ArticleTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders2023
A 20-year multicentre retrospective review of optic nerve sheath fenestration outcomes.
Article in Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 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.
- Time is vision: a systematic review of urgent venous sinus stenting for fulminant idiopathic intracranial hypertension.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- The effects of optic nerve sheath fenestration on visual function and OCT metrics in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a retrospective study.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Optic Nerve Sheath Fenestration for Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. A Subgroup-Focused Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.ASIDE internal medicine · 2025Article
- Progress and recognition of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: A narrative review.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Review
- Optic Nerve Sheath Fenestration: A Retrospective Review of Its Safety, Efficacy, and Impact on Optical Coherence Tomography.Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Optic nerve sheath fenestration (ONSF) longitudinal outcomes remain unclear and are vital in the assessment of vision failure in patients with raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Furthermore, limited observational data exists regarding its use in other causes of raised ICP. Objective: To determine the efficacy and safety of ONSF for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), and other indications. Method: Multicentre study from a tertiary hospital and specialty eye referral hospital in Melbourne, Australia, from July 2000 to December 2020. A total of 116 eyes from 70 patients undergoing ONSF were retrospectively reviewed with patient demographics, surgery indications, visual acuity (VA), visual fields, fundus photos of optic discs, retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness, average thickness of optic discs on optical coherence tomography (OCT), and complications recorded. Parametric tests were used to compare the treatment groups pre- and post-operatively. Results: A total of 116 eyes from 70 patients underwent ONSF, which involved 92 eyes with IIH, 9 eyes with CVST, and 15 eyes with other aetiologies ('Other'). Post ONSF, there was a best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement or stabilisation in 84% of patients in all groups, with 50% achieving a BCVA of 6/6 or better at the final follow-up. RNFL, visual fields, and fundus grades all trended towards improvement, with most improvement noted by day 360. Common complications included transient diplopia ( Conclusion: Our data demonstrates effectiveness in the use of ONSF in papilloedema with visual failure due to IIH or CVST and when other CSF diversion procedures or medical therapies have failed.
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.