SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Transcranial doppler ultrasonography in normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis of diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring roles.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasonography provides noninvasive measurements of cerebral hemodynamics, but its clinical role in normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) remains uncertain. We reviewed its diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring applications. Five databases were searched through June 10, 2025 for quantitative TCD studies in adults with suspected or confirmed NPH. Study-level eligibility and denominators were reconciled against full reports. Design-specific critical appraisal distinguished physiological association, treatment response, and diagnostic discrimination. Exploratory meta-analyses assessed paired three-month post-shunt changes using restricted maximum likelihood and modified Hartung-Knapp confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes. Sixteen direct TCD reports were retained. Potentially overlapping cohorts precluded a reliable total of unique patients. Two shunt studies contributed 21 paired participants. Pooled changes were - 0.14 for pulsatility index (PI; 95% CI - 0.49 to 0.21), - 2.29 cm/s for mean flow velocity (95% CI - 40.37 to 35.79), and 0.75 for Hedges-corrected standardized reactivity change (95% CI - 2.39 to 3.88). The conventional PI interval excluded zero ( - 0.20 to - 0.09), illustrating sensitivity to inference. Physiological associations, small response subgroups, and apparent waveform discrimination did not establish independent clinical utility. TCD can characterize cerebral hemodynamics in NPH, but current evidence does not establish diagnostic thresholds, independent prediction of shunt response, or validated surveillance criteria. Post-shunt physiological changes remain exploratory and do not demonstrate clinical benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867704What 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.