ArticleJournal of neurology2024
Is there a spinal tap responder in progressive supranuclear palsy? The first prospective study.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parkinsonism in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus or Hydrocephalic Presentation in Parkinson's Disease: A Report of Three Cases.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Pathway to Regulatory Approval of Digital Health Technologies in Progressive Supranuclear Palsy: A Scoping Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- The Glymphatic System in Cerebrospinal Fluid Dynamics: Clinical Implications, Its Evaluation, and Application to Therapeutics.Neuro-degenerative diseases · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveProgressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease, and sometimes shows idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH)-like presentations. We aimed to evaluate spinal tap responsiveness in patients with PSP, including the effect of sham spinal tap.
methodsEleven patients with PSP, ten with probable/definite iNPH, and eight control patients were prospectively enrolled. All participants underwent sham spinal tap and spinal tap procedures. Gait was evaluated using wearable inertial sensors. We defined "tap responders" as individuals with a 10% or more improvement from baseline in any of the gait parameters (timed up-and-go test total time, stride length, and velocity during straight walking under single-task and cognitive dual-task conditions). We compared the ratio of responders in patients with PSP to patients with iNPH and controls.
resultsThe ratio of tap responders and the ratio of sham tap responders in patients with PSP were significantly higher than those in control patients, and not different from those in patients with iNPH. PSP patients with iNPH-like MRI features tended to respond to the spinal tap compared to those without such imaging features. Notably, one patient with PSP, who responded to the spinal tap beyond the effect of sham spinal tap, was treated by the shunt operation.
conclusionThis is the first prospective study to demonstrate tap and shunt responsiveness in patients with PSP while highlighting the placebo effects of the spinal tap in patients with PSP or iNPH. Our findings suggest that some PSP patients have impaired cerebrospinal fluid circulation, contributing to a distinct component of the clinical spectrum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38700563What 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.