ReviewSurgical neurology international2025
Different methods of cerebrospinal fluid diversion in patients with leptomeningeal metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 2025. 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.
- The cerebrospinal fluid immune microenvironment in lung cancer leptomeningeal metastasis: cellular ecosystems and therapeutic possibilities.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
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: Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is one of the complications of primary malignancies, particularly in solid tumors. The consequence of LM is increased intracranial pressure (ICP) or secondary hydrocephalus. The most frequent method for diverting cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in this group is a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS); however, the capability of CSF diversion in improving patients' survival has been debatable. There is currently no established protocol for treating LM patients with elevated ICP. Methods: We searched for studies involving patients with LM who underwent CSF diversion in multiple search databases. The search flow followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol criteria. Results: This review includes a total of 15 studies. The average age at diagnosis was 55.3 ± 3.9 years. Among 415 patients, lung cancer was the most frequent primary malignancy. Overall symptom improvement from CSF diversion is 86% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.92). Complication rate among patients who had permanent CSF diversion is 18% (95% CI: 0.11.24). Overall survival in the LM population can be improved by permanent CSF diversion ( Conclusion: This review demonstrated that patients with LM may benefit from a higher chance of survival with permanent CSF diversion. Further research is required to determine the role of various CSF diversion methods in improving survival.
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.