ArticleNeurology research international2026
Comparative Outcomes and Efficacy of Programmable Versus Nonprogrammable Ventriculoperitoneal Shunts in the Management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Neurology research international, 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.
- Comparative Outcomes and Efficacy of Programmable Versus Nonprogrammable Ventriculoperitoneal Shunts in the Management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A Retrospective Study.Neurology research international · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is a neurological disorder in older adults, characterized by gait disturbance, urinary incontinence, and cognitive impairment, along with ventriculomegaly and normal intracranial pressure. The management of NPH often involves ventriculoperitoneal shunting (VPS), which can be programmable (P-VPS) or nonprogrammable (NP-VPS). While P-VPS offers the advantage of adjustable pressure settings, its impact on clinical outcomes and complications remains debated, particularly in resource-limited settings like Jordan. Method: A retrospective review was conducted of 38 adult patients diagnosed with idiopathic NPH who underwent VPS placement between 2018 and 2024. Patients were classified into two groups: P-VPS and NP-VPS. Clinical outcomes, including symptom improvement, complication rates, hospital stay duration, and shunt revisions, were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were made using SPSS, with Results: The study found no significant differences between the two groups in symptom improvement. However, the NP-VPS group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (5.7 ± 3.2 days vs. 14.1 ± 11.9 days, Conclusion: Both P-VPS and NP-VPS resulted in similar symptom improvements, with NP-VPS showing a trend toward shorter hospital stays and comparable complication rates. Further multicenter studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings and refine management strategies for NPH.
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.