ReviewThe ultrasound journal2023
Ultrasound detected increase in optic disk height to identify elevated intracranial pressure: a systematic review.
Review in The ultrasound journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- B-mode transorbital ultrasonography for the diagnosis of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023Pooled it
- Point-of-care diagnostics are central to acute medicine delivery.Future healthcare journal · 2026Article
- Sonographic Visualization of a Tortuous Optic Nerve: Case Report of a Novel Finding on Point-of-Care Ultrasound.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2025Article
- A Rare Case of Rash, Blurry Vision, and Papilledema Caused by Isolated Ocular Syphilis.Cureus · 2024Article
- Optic neuropathy in craniosynostosis.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElevated intracranial pressure (eICP) is a serious medical emergency that requires prompt identification and monitoring. The current gold standards of eICP detection require patient transportation, radiation, and can be invasive. Ocular ultrasound has emerged as a rapid, non-invasive, bedside tool to measure correlates of eICP. This systematic review seeks to explore the utility of ultrasound detected optic disc elevation (ODE) as an ultrasonographic finding of eICP and to study its sensitivity and specificity as a marker of eICP.
methodsThis systematic review followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central for English articles published before April 2023; yielding 1,919 total citations. After eliminating duplicates, and screening the records, we identified 29 articles that addressed ultrasonographically detected ODE.
resultsThe 29 articles included a total of 1249 adult and pediatric participants. In patients with papilledema, the mean ODE ranged between 0.6 mm and 1.2 mm. Proposed cutoff values for ODE ranged between 0.3 mm and 1 mm. The majority of studies reported a sensitivity between 70 and 90%, and specificity ranged from 69 to 100%, with a majority of studies reporting a specificity of 100%.
conclusionsODE and ultrasonographic characteristics of the optic disc may aid in differentiating papilledema from other conditions. Further research on ODE elevation and its correlation with other ultrasonographic signs is warranted as a means to increase the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the setting of eICP.
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.