A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3145
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cerebrospinal fluid pressure dynamics as a biomechanical marker for quantification of spinal cord compression: Conceptual framework and systematic review of clinical trials. | LitMetric

Introduction: In patients with acute spinal cord injury (SCI) and degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), spinal cord compression is considered a main contributor to spinal cord damage, associated with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) space obstruction. CSF pressure (CSFP) dynamics are studied as a potential indirect biomechanical marker for spinal cord compression, and as a proxy to estimate spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP).

Research Question: Evidence for safety and feasibility of CSFP dynamics in clinical trials as well as interrelations with neuroimaging and intraspinal pressure, and relation to preclinical CSFP models.

Material And Methods: Systematic review. This review followed PRISMA guidelines, risk of bias assessment with ROBINS-I tool, PROSPERO registration (CRD42024545629).

Results: 11 relevant papers were identified (n = 212 patients, n = 194 intraoperative, n = 18 bedside). Risk of bias for safety reporting was low-moderate. Intraoperative CSFP assessments were commonly performed in acute SCI. CSFP was assessed to calculate SCPP (7/11), to evaluate effects from surgical decompression (5/11) and for therapeutic CSF drainage (3/11). The adverse event rate associated with the intrathecal catheter was 8% (n = 15/194).

Discussion And Conclusion: The preliminary safety and feasibility profile of CSFP assessments in spinal cord compression encourages clinical application. However, a deeper risk-benefit analysis is limited as the clinical value is not yet determined, given challenges of defining disease specific critical CSFP and SCPP thresholds. The interrelation between measures of CSFP and neuroimaging is yet to be proven. Targeted preclinical studies are essential to improve our understanding of complex CSFP-cord compression interrelations.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11879606PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2025.104211DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spinal cord
28
cord compression
16
cerebrospinal fluid
8
biomechanical marker
8
systematic review
8
clinical trials
8
csfp
8
csfp dynamics
8
safety feasibility
8
risk bias
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!