ArticleNeurosurgery practice2025
Comparison of Accuracy Between Image-Guided and Freehand External Ventricular Drain Bedside Placement in Association With Time Efficacy.
Article in Neurosurgery practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Common Endpoints in Studies of Image-Based Guidance in External Ventricular Drain Placement: A Scoping Review.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- External ventricular drainage in modern neurosurgical practice: optimization, standardization, and emerging guidance technologies.Frontiers in neurologyReview
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesA common neurosurgical procedure is the placement of an external ventricular drain (EVD), often as a time-sensitive treatment for hydrocephalus and/or increased intracranial pressure. The etiology ranges from traumatic brain injury to spontaneous intracranial hemorrhages, frequently causing change to ventricular anatomy, making them difficult targets. The goal of this study was to determine whether the use of image-guidance for bedside EVD placement improves accuracy and decreases number of passes with the same time-effectiveness.
methodsAdult patients with bedside EVD placement for traumatic brain injury or spontaneous intracranial hemorrhages between October 2021 and December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed and dichotomized by electromagnetic image-guided or freehand EVDs. The primary outcome was the rate of suboptimal placement (defined by Kakarla score). The secondary outcomes were rates of multipass EVDs and procedural time.
resultsOf 44 patients included, median age was 59 years (IQR 44-66), and 59.1% were men. Median midline shift was different between image-guided (3.5 mm [IQR 1.5-6.3]) and freehand (0 mm [IQR 0-5]) EVDs (
conclusionImage guidance in bedside EVD placement does not require more time in comparison with freehand EVD placement and is associated with fewer passes and higher accuracy.
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.