ArticleNeuroradiology2026
The technique for lateral cervical puncture.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CT-guided thoracic cerebrospinal fluid puncture as an alternative approach when conventional approaches fail.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to retrospectively analyze anatomical parameters for safe LCP performance and provide a technical note on its execution.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 200 head computed tomography (CT) scans to identify the optimal LCP point (P), defined by the intersection of the anterior margin of the C1 posterior arch and the midpoint between the inferior C1 posterior arch and superior C2 lamina. Anatomical distances (D1, D2, D3) from this point to relevant landmarks were measured. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Student’s t-test to compare groups. A detailed technical note on LCP execution, including patient positioning, anatomical considerations, and procedural steps, is provided, augmented by an illustrative case.
resultsThe mean age of the 200 patients (108 females, 92 males) was 63.67 ± 11.79 years. Mean distances were D1: 7.04 ± 2.09 mm, D2: 14.59 ± 4.94 mm, and D3: 12.17 ± 4.79 mm. No statistically significant differences in puncture distances were observed between sexes or age groups (≤ 60 vs. >60 years), except for D3 in women, where those over 60 years exhibited a significantly greater mean distance compared to younger women (p = 0.047). The illustrative case describes a 61-year-old male who developed a surgical site infection and required CSF analysis, for which LCP was successfully performed due to contraindication for LP, yielding clear CSF with negative cultures.
conclusionsLCP is a safe and effective alternative for CSF collection in scenarios where LP is contraindicated. Our anatomical findings, supported by the illustrative case, delineate consistent landmarks and suggest minimal anatomical variation that might necessitate slight adjustments, particularly for D3 in older women. The detailed technical approach combined with anatomical precision enhances the safety and efficacy of LCP, making it a valuable tool in neurosurgical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41557051What 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.