ArticleEuropean radiology2021
Systematic volumetric analysis predicts response to CSF drainage and outcome to shunt surgery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.
Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of Satisfactory Surgical Outcome in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus (Review).Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2024Pooled it
- Radiological predictors of shunt response in the diagnosis and treatment of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Pooled it
- Moving on in hydrocephalus imaging: from 2D to 3D biomarkers.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Review
- MRI-based cerebrospinal fluid volumetric indices for predicting tap test response in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Observational
- Baseline radiological parameters associated with good neurological outcome following ventriculoperitoneal shunt in normal pressure hydrocephalus: A single-center study on 82 patients.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Article
- Inadequacies in iNPH diagnosis: envisioning a paradigm shift towards integrated, multi-modal testing, and consensus-driven research for improved patient outcomes.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Article
- The Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Markers of Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) on Non-Contrast CT Scans of the Brain.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Following Cranial Radiation: Identification of Shunting Responders.Cancers · 2023Article
- The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and prognosis of dementia.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2023Review
- Can Shunt Response in Patients with Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Be Predicted from Preoperative Brain Imaging? A Retrospective Study of the Diagnostic Use of the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale in 119 Patients.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIdiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by excess cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the ventricles, which can be diagnosed by invasive CSF drainage test and treated by shunt placement. Here, we aim to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic power of systematic volumetric analysis based on brain structural MRI for INPH.
methodsWe performed a retrospective study with a cohort of 104 probable INPH patients who underwent CSF drainage tests and another cohort of 41 INPH patients who had shunt placement. High-resolution T1-weighted images of the patients were segmented using an automated pipeline into 283 structures that are grouped into different granularity levels for volumetric analysis. Volumes at multi-granularity levels were used in a recursive feature elimination model to classify CSF drainage responders and non-responders. We then used pre-surgical brain volumes to predict Tinetti and MMSE scores after shunting, based on the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator.
resultsThe classification accuracy of differentiating the CSF drainage responders and non-responders increased as the granularity increased. The highest diagnostic accuracy was achieved at the finest segmentation with a sensitivity/specificity/precision/accuracy of 0.89/0.91/0.84/0.90 and an area under the curve of 0.94. The predicted post-surgical neurological scores showed high correlations with the ground truth, with r = 0.80 for Tinetti and r = 0.88 for MMSE. The anatomical features that played important roles in the diagnostic and prognostic tasks were also illustrated.
conclusionsWe demonstrated that volumetric analysis with fine segmentation could reliably differentiate CSF drainage responders from other INPH-like patients, and it could accurately predict the neurological outcomes after shunting. KEY POINTS: • We performed a fully automated segmentation of brain MRI at multiple granularity levels for systematic volumetric analysis of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) patients. • We were able to differentiate patients that responded to CSF drainage test with an accuracy of 0.90 and area under the curve of 0.94 in a cohort of 104 probable INPH patients, as well as to predict the post-shunt gait and cognitive scores with a coefficient of 0.80 for Tinetti and 0.88 for MMSE. • Feature analysis showed the inferior lateral ventricle, bilateral hippocampus, and orbital cortex are positive indicators of CSF drainage responders, whereas the posterior deep white matter and parietal subcortical white matter were negative predictors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.