ReviewNeurotrauma reports2025
Clinical Studies Examining Intrathecal Drainage for Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: A Living Systematic Review.
Review in Neurotrauma reports, 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
Traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) can cause significant and permanent disability. For over 20 years, lumbar cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage has been routinely performed during the surgical repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. However, intrathecal CSF drainage has not been adequately evaluated in the setting of acute TSCI. This living systematic review sought to evaluate whether intrathecal catheter CSF drainage to reduce intrathecal pressure (ITP) in the acute postinjury phase was safe and feasible and could improve clinical indices and neurological recovery in patients with acute TSCI. A literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception to March 2024 yielded 1007 potentially relevant articles, 806 were excluded based on title and abstract search and 147 articles underwent full article review. There were two randomized controlled studies, and one cohort study included in the review. Sample sizes ranged from 11 to 22 patients with an age range of 23-67 years. Drains were placed at different times postinjury in each study, with a range of 10-72 h. In the first study, open CSF drainage was used to decrease ITP to 10 mmHg (limit of 10 mL/h). The second study used periodic drainage with up to 10 mL of CSF drained each time (maximum of 30 mL/day). The third study used an open, less restrictive CSF drainage with a target ITP of <10 mmHg. Mean arterial blood pressure and spinal cord perfusion pressure were measured in all three studies. One study evaluated direct intraspinal pressure monitoring. Despite small sample sizes, the three studies demonstrated that intrathecal CSF drainage through a lumbar catheter was feasible and safe acutely after TSCI. Additionally, the results suggest an overall improvement in spinal cord perfusion acutely and trends toward improvements in neurological recovery. There is an important need for much larger prospective trials to evaluate CSF drainage together with other treatment and monitoring strategies to optimize care and improve outcomes. Innovative clinical trial designs could more efficiently evaluate multimodal treatments.
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.