ArticleNeuroSci2024
Discontinuation of Cerebro-Spinal Fluid (CSF) Drainage in Acute Hydrocephalus: A Prospective Cohort Study and Exploratory Data Analysis.
Article in NeuroSci, 2024. 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.
- Evaluation of a Novel Automated Cerebral Ventricular Drainage System for Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage in Neurocritical Care Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Study.Neurocritical care · 2026Trial
- Safety and Additive Efficacy of Dual CSF Drainage (Ventricular + Lumbar) in Severe Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Secondary Analysis of the EARLYDRAIN Trial.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal management of CSF drainage in acute hydrocephalus, in particular when to initiate drain weaning, remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of timing and method of drain weaning on patient outcomes.
methodsThis prospective observational study in a large-volume tertiary neuroscience centre included all adult patients who required temporary CSF drainage for acute hydrocephalus of any cause between January 2020 and March 2021. Contemporaneous data collection was conducted, including patient demographics, time to clamp, weaning methods, and clinical outcomes of hospital length of stay (LOS), rate of shunt insertion, drain-related infections, and mechanical complications. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to identify the independent associations of timing-related factors.
resultsA total of 69 patients were included (mean age = 59.4 years). A total of 59% had CSF diversion for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and 88% had EVD drainage. The length of drainage prior to the first clamp was significantly associated with the overall length of drainage ( DISCUSSION: This study recommends challenging the drain early via a rapid wean to reduce LOS, mechanical complications, and possibly infections. The consequences of temporary CSF diversion have significant implications at financial and patient levels, but the quality of evidence regarding weaning remains poor. Further randomised multicentre studies and national databases of practice are required to allow definitive conclusions to be drawn.
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.