ArticleJournal of neurosurgery. Case lessons2024
Penetrating intracranial injury from a pencil in a pediatric patient: illustrative case.
Article in Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntracranial penetrating injuries from a pencil are exceptionally rare. The most common mechanism is a child running while holding a pencil. Potential consequences of intracranial pencil injury include direct trauma to brain structures, vascular injury, and intracranial abscess formation. OBSERVATIONS: A 3-year-old girl was at daycare and had fallen while running with a pencil. Computed tomography showed a pencil penetrating the left parietal bone through the left temporal lobe, terminating in the posterior limb of the internal capsule. Cerebral angiography was performed prior to the removal of the pencil to rule out vascular injury. Angiography of the left carotid artery revealed slight irregularity in the left M2 but no active extravasation. The patient was then taken to the operating room to have the pencil removed. Postoperatively, she did well and was discharged home after 6 days with no neurological deficits. LESSONS: Pencils are rare causes of intracranial injury in children. Definitive vascular imaging prior to pencil removal to rule out vascular injury and minimize the risk of hemorrhage after removal is recommended. Intraoperative irrigation and debridement, followed by antibiotics, are recommended to avoid abscess formation. Follow-up vascular imaging is recommended to rule out pseudoaneurysm. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24494.
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.