SynthesisActa neurochirurgica2021
Clinical predictors of shunt response in the diagnosis and treatment of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta neurochirurgica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gait characteristics in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a review on the effects of CSF tap test and shunt surgery.European journal of medical research · 2024Pooled it
- 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
- Association between p-tau181 in cerebrospinal fluid and shunt response in patients with normal-pressure hydrocephalus.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Clinical Subgroups and Treatment Outcomes in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: Application of Machine Learning-Based Clustering.Neurosurgery practice · 2026Article
- Review
- Assessment of patients affected by INPH after external lumbar drainage: what is the better timing?Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictive Value of Digital Neuropsychological and Gait Assessments on Shunt Outcome in Patients With Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Ultrasound-measured optic nerve sheath diameter as a non-invasive tool for screening elevated-pressure from normal-pressure hydrocephalus: a cross-sectional study.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Non-invasive versus invasive techniques for predicting idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus in shunt-responsive patients.Neurosurgical review · 2025Review
- Predictors of shunt response in iNPH: differentiating responders, early and late non-responders, and the role of valve adjustments.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Time Course of Symptoms in Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Deformation of brain in normal pressure hydrocephalus is more readily associated with slow vasomotion rather than heartbeat related pulsations of intracranial pressure.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2025Article
- Beyond early motor response: Longitudinal cognitive and gait assessments after extended lumbar drainage in normal pressure hydrocephalus.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- The effectiveness of various CSF diversion surgeries in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Prediction of Surgical Outcomes in Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus by MR Elastography.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical improvements in temporospatial gait variables after a spinal tap test in individuals with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Consensus-based recommendations for diagnosis and surgical management of cranioplasty and post-traumatic hydrocephalus from a European panel.Brain & spine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPositive shunt response (SR) remains the gold standard for diagnosing idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). However, multiple pathologies mimic iNPH symptoms, making it difficult to select patients who will respond to shunt surgery. Although presenting features, extended lumbar drainage (ELD), infusion test (IT), intracranial pressure monitoring (ICPM), and tap test (TT) have been used to predict SR, uncertainty remains over which diagnostic test to choose.
objectiveTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify clinical predictors of shunt responsiveness, evaluate their diagnostic effectiveness, and recommend the most effective diagnostic tests.
methodsEmbase, MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, and JSTOR were searched for original studies investigating clinical predictors of SR in iNPH patients. Included studies were assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool, and eligible studies were evaluated using univariate and bivariate meta-analyses.
resultsThirty-five studies were included. Nine studies discussed the diagnostic use of presenting clinical features, 8 studies ELD, 8 studies IT, 11 studies ICPM, and 6 studies TT. A meta-analysis of 21 eligible studies was conducted for TT, ELD, IT, and ICPM. ICPM yielded the highest diagnostic effectiveness, with diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) = 50.9 and area under curve (AUC) = 0.836. ELD yielded DOR = 27.70 and AUC = 0.753, IT had DOR = 5.70 and AUC = 0.729, and TT scored DOR = 3.86 and AUC = 0.711.
conclusionIntraparenchymal ICPM is statistically the most effective diagnostic test, followed by ELD, IT, and lastly TT. Due to the higher accessibility of TT and IT, they are recommended to be used first line, using a timed-up-and-go improvement ≥ 5.6 s or a Rout cut-off range between 13 and 16 mmHg, respectively. Patients who test negative should ideally be followed up with ICPM, using mean ICP wave amplitude [Formula: see text] 4 mmHg, or 1- to 4-day ELD with an MMSE cut-off improvement [Formula: see text] 3. Future research must use standardized methodologies for each diagnostic test and uniform criteria for SR to allow better comparison.
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.