Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41081848›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026

Normative cerebellar tonsil position in healthy individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Veeresh Veeresh, Mamatha Hosapatna, Girish Menon, Mithun Shekar, Nupur Pruthi, Aamna Kausar

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Clinical and MRI morphometric characterization of symptomatic cerebellar tonsillar ectopia.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Veeresh VeereshKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Mamatha HosapatnaKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka, India. mamatha.h@manipal.edu.
Girish MenonKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Mithun ShekarKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Nupur PruthiNational Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Aamna KausarDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe cerebellar tonsils are critical anatomical landmarks in craniospinal imaging, yet normative data describing their position in healthy populations are sparse and inconsistent. Defining statistically grounded reference values may support anatomical interpretation in conditions such as Chiari malformation type I, while recognising that clinical diagnosis remains symptom-driven.

objectiveTo determine the average cerebellar tonsil position relative to the McRae line using MRI, data from asymptomatic individuals with normal craniospinal MRI were synthesised to provide a standardised normative benchmark.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies were identified through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science searches up to 14 May 2025. Eligible studies were MRI-based cross-sectional designs reporting mean cerebellar tonsil position, standard deviation, and sample size in healthy populations. Risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated using the Adaptation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for Cross-Sectional Studies (NOS-xs). A Der Simonian-Laird random-effects model was used to calculate pooled means, and heterogeneity was assessed via I², Tau², and Cochran's Q. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test robustness. Certainty of evidence was appraised using the GRADE approach.

resultsFifteen studies encompassing 3,940 healthy individuals were included. The pooled mean cerebellar tonsil position was + 1.13 mm above the McRae line with reference interval (- 4.67 to + 6.93 mm). However, existing studies show substantial heterogeneity (I² = 98%, p < 0.01), underscoring the need for cautious application and further standardisation. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the consistency of findings across multiple exclusion strategies. Certainty of evidence was rated as moderate due to variation in study quality and reporting. DISCUSSION: The pooled estimate provides a normative reference for cerebellar tonsil position in healthy individuals. However, high heterogeneity (I² = 98%), moderate ROB, and geographic clustering limit generalizability. These findings may aid anatomical interpretation, but clinical decisions should remain symptom-guided.

conclusionsThe pooled estimate establishes a normative reference for the position of the cerebellar tonsils in asymptomatic individuals with normal craniospinal MRI findings. This information can assist in the anatomical interpretation of craniospinal imaging. However, considerable variability and geographic clustering can limit its general applicability. Clinical decisions should continue to be guided by symptoms, and future studies should use standardised imaging techniques and broader sampling methods to enhance diagnostic relevance.

Indexed as

CerebellumHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReference ValuesAsymptomatic individualsCerebellar tonsilMcRae lineMRINormative data

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.