ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
A controlled lumbar puncture procedure improves the safety of lumbar puncture.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental Knowledge and Acceptance of Pediatric Lumbar Puncture in Northern Saudi Arabia: Implications for Clinical Practice and Education: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pediatric reports · 2025Article
- Revising the role of cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis as a diagnostic criterion in Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In order to improve the safety of lumbar puncture (LP), we designed a new type of LP needle, that is, an integrated and controlled LP needle, which can actively and accurately control the flow rate and retention of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) during puncture, so as to achieve a controlled LP procedure. Objective: To evaluate whether a controlled LP procedure can improve the comfort of LP and reduce the risk of complications associated with LP. Methods: Patients requiring LP (n = 63) were pierced with an integrated and controlled LP needle or a conventional LP needle. The differences in vital signs, symptom score, comfort, operation time, CSF loss, CSF pressure fluctuation and back pain before and after puncture were analyzed. Results: An integrated and controlled LP needle (n = 35) significantly improved patients' headache symptoms before and after puncture. In addition, a controlled LP procedure significantly reduced the amount of unnecessary CSF loss ( Conclusion: A controlled LP procedure avoids unnecessary CSF loss, prevents rapid fluctuations in CSF pressure in patients with HICP, and reduces the risks associated with LP.
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.