ReviewSurgical neurology international2025
Neuroimaging markers of intracranial hypertension in cerebral venous thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 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.
- Extensive Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis With Obstructive Hydrocephalus in a Young Female With Underlying Essential Thrombocythemia: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Impact of experience and specialization on accuracy and perceived performance of needling techniques in the cubital tunnel: a cadaveric study.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Review
- Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Pathophysiologic Insights, Clinical Evaluation Tools, and Novel Therapeutic Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is commonly associated with intracranial hypertension (IH), though its neuroimaging markers remain less well-defined. This study aims to systematically review and compare neuroimaging markers of IH in CVT and idiopathic IH (IIH) to better understand their diagnostic implications. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. From inception to 2024, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for observational studies and randomized controlled trials focusing on neuroimaging findings in primary IH (i.e., IIH) and IH secondary to CVT. Data were extracted on neuroimaging outcomes, including peri-optic cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure, optic nerve head protrusion, and others. Results: Six studies met the eligibility criteria, comprising three cohort studies and three case-control studies, with a combined total of 301 patients. The results indicated that peri-optic CSF pressure (Odds ratio [OR]: 5.85, Conclusion: Typical neuroimaging characteristics of IH (e.g., empty sella) are more frequently observed in idiopathic cases (i.e., IIH) than in secondary causes, such as IH resulting from CVT. These differences have the potential to enhance diagnostic precision and facilitate the development of improved imaging protocols.
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.