Trial reportNeurocritical care2026
Evaluation of a Novel Automated Cerebral Ventricular Drainage System for Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage in Neurocritical Care Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Study.
Trial report in Neurocritical care, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeurointensive care is moving toward more automated patient management. This study aimed to evaluate a novel external ventricular drainage (EVD) system, the VGuard® system, as a tool for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring and automating ventricular drainage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), focusing on its safety and potential to reduce complications associated with manual EVD management.
methodsThis prospective, randomized clinical study was conducted in the Department of Neurosurgery at Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. Patients (aged > 18 years) with different acute brain pathologies requiring an EVD were enrolled and randomized (1:1) to receive the VGuard® system or a manual EVD. Both systems employed a ventricular probe for simultaneous intraventricular and intraparenchymal ICP monitoring. Measurement accuracy was determined by comparing the median of absolute difference in ICP, using the Mann-Whitney U test. To further investigate the accuracy of ICP measuring, a post hoc Spearman correlation test was applied. In addition, as part of a post hoc analysis, we evaluated patient outcomes.
resultsA total of 30 patients were included in the study. The VGuard® system demonstrated significantly better accuracy in ICP measurements compared with the manual EVD; median absolute difference: 1.07 versus 2.88, p < 0.001; median Spearman correlation coefficients: 0.81 versus 0.48, p < 0.05. There were no statistically significant differences in patient outcomes [mortality, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE), modified Rankin Scale (mRS), median time with the EVD, and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay], or adverse events (AE). No serious adverse events were noted.
conclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate the VGuard® system, showing results of increased accuracy in measured ICP compared with the manual EVD. The VGuard® system offers an automated EVD solution, representing a step toward increased neurointensive care automation.
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.