SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Advancing treatment strategies for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review on studies comparing ventricular and lumbo-peritoneal shunts.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autopsy Confirmed Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) Presenting With Corticobasal Syndrome.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Speed of clinical response to external lumbar drainage as a predictor of outcome of ventriculoperitoneal shunt in normal pressure hydrocephalus: A prospective cohort study.Surgical neurology international · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Lumboperitoneal shunting as a rescue strategy in the management of complex cranial wound conditions.Brain & spine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is characterized by the clinical triad of gait disturbance, cognitive decline, and urinary incontinence. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion is the gold standard treatment. Despite ventriculo-peritoneal shunt (VPS) is more commonly used, lumbo-peritoneal shunt (LPS) offers a minimally invasive alternative, raising questions about their relative efficacy and safety. A systematic review was conducted on multiple databases with a two-step selection process in order to exclude studies with insufficient data, irrelevance, and lacking of comparative analysis between the two procedures. From the included studies we comparatively analyzed preoperative clinical-radiological characteristics, surgical details and clinical-radiological outcome. We included 6 studies matching out inclusion criteria. Both VPS and LPS improved functional and cognitive performance. VPS provided faster symptoms relief, but has been related with higher risks of infection, whereas LPS showed a safer profile but required more frequent revisions due to mechanical issues. VPS and LPS are both effective treatments for iNPH. The choice of intervention should be tailored on the individual patient risk profiles, resource availability, and surgical expertise. Future research should focus on standardizing assessment scores, solve controversies, and evaluate long-term outcomes.
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.