SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
External lumbar drain for fistula leakage in posterior fossa and spinal surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage is a frequent complication after posterior fossa and spinal surgeries. External lumbar drainage (ELD) is used to promote leak resolution, but its effectiveness and safety remain debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ELD compared to conservative management. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing ELD with conservative treatment for postoperative CSF leaks were included. Primary outcome was leak resolution; secondary outcomes included adverse events, meningitis, and headache. Random-effects models were used to calculate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Eight studies (519 patients: 317 ELD, 202 conservative) were included. ELD significantly increased CSF leak resolution (OR 2.19; 95% CI 1.18-4.07; p = 0.013). No significant differences were observed in subgroup analyses by surgical location. Adverse events did not differ significantly between groups (OR 0.82; p = 0.766), and the overall ELD-related complication rate was 1.8%. ELD improves CSF leak resolution rates with a low complication profile. The observed benefit for leak resolution was not robust, as significance was lost in sensitivity analysis. Its use should be individualized based on surgical context and patient risk. Further randomized studies are needed to guide standardized protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41099843What 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.