ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2025
Density and Time Characteristics of CSF-Venous Fistulas on CT Myelography in Patients with Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2025. 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.
- Enhancing Clarity in Dynamic Myelography Reporting: Results of a Survey of Patients and Referring Providers Evaluating a Standardized Reporting System in the Myelographic Work-Up of Patients with Suspected Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Optimizing density of intrathecal contrast at digital subtraction myelography: Evaluation of differing needle characteristics and injection rates in a phantom.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Technical Aspects of Dynamic CT Myelography: Optimizing Patient Positioning for the Detection of CSF Leaks.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe conspicuity of CSF-venous fistulas (CVFs) on specialized myelographic imaging protocols varies, and the factors that determine their visibility have not yet been extensively studied. The purpose of this study was to determine the relative effect of 2 variables on CVF visibility: timing of imaging and intrathecal contrast attenuation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective cohort of 24 patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension due to a CVF who underwent a total of 34 CT myelographies was studied. All CTM acquisitions that included the level of the known definite CVF were evaluated for 1) time passed after injection of contrast, 2) attenuation of the adjacent subarachnoid space, 3) subjective visibility of the CVF on that series, 4) attenuation of the corresponding draining vein, and 5) contrast dose used.
resultsA total of 131 acquisitions included the level of the known CVFs. Attenuation values of the thecal sac were significantly higher in acquisitions where the CVFs were definitely visible (average 2283 HU) than in acquisitions where the CVFs were equivocal or not visible (764 HU and 583 HU, respectively). No significant difference was shown in the timing of the acquisitions between the 3 groups (12.8 minutes, 20.4 minutes, and 17.5 minutes, respectively). Multivariate linear regression showed thecal sac attenuation to be the only independent predictor of the attenuation of the CVF draining vein. Time passed after contrast injection was not independently correlated.
conclusionsIntrathecal contrast attenuation has a strong positive relationship with the visibility of CVF. Timing of the acquisition was not an independent predictor of CVF visibility under our acquisition protocol.
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.