Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41806201›Full record

ArticleNeurosurgical review2026

Cortical thickness analysis combined with CSF dynamics improves diagnostic stratification in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Daniele Piccolo, Daniele Bagatto, Serena D'Agostini, Maria Cristina De Colle, Enrico Belgrado, Yan Tereshko, Marco Vindigni, Francesco Tuniz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniele PiccoloDepartment of Clinical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Via Alessandro Brambilla, 74, Pavia (PV), 27100, PV, Italy. daniele.piccolo01@universitadipavia.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9525-078X
Daniele BagattoUnit of Neuroradiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine (UD), 33100, Italy.
Serena D'AgostiniUnit of Neuroradiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine (UD), 33100, Italy.
Maria Cristina De ColleUnit of Neuroradiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine (UD), 33100, Italy.
Enrico BelgradoUnit of Neurology, Department of Neuroscience, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Presidio Ospedaliero Universitario Santa Maria della Misericordia, Piazzale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 15, Udine, UD, 33100, Italy.
Yan TereshkoUnit of Neurology, Department of Neuroscience, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Presidio Ospedaliero Universitario Santa Maria della Misericordia, Piazzale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 15, Udine, UD, 33100, Italy.
Marco VindigniUnit of Neurosurgery, Department of Head-Neck and Neuroscience, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine (UD), 33100, Italy.
Francesco TunizUnit of Neurosurgery, Department of Head-Neck and Neuroscience, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine (UD), 33100, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnostic landscape for idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus is intricate, and there is a pressing need for accurate and cost-effective methods. Because of the lack of accurate diagnostic and prognostic quantitative biomarkers, the frequent presence of comorbidities, and the limited understanding of the pathophysiology of the disorder, only a minority of patients receive disease-specific treatment. While traditional neuroimaging offers insights, its isolated diagnostic precision can be enhanced. Emerging quantitative methods analyzing cortical thickness based on standard T1-weighted brain MR images offer new diagnostic possibilities. We analyzed 294 patients referred to our clinic from January 2015 until December 2022. After the exclusion criteria, the final sample consisted of 100 possible iNPH patients. Of these, 71 underwent ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery, while 29 did not qualify post-evaluation. Cortical thickness was assessed using an advanced deep-learning neuroimaging pipeline. For predictive modeling, we employed a comprehensive set of Machine Learning algorithms, including Distributed Random Forests, Extremely Randomized Trees, Generalized Linear Model with Regularization, Gradient Boosting Machines, Extreme Gradient Boosting machines, and a fully connected multi-layer Artificial Neural Network. These algorithms were strategically combined into a Super Learner ensemble approach to harness their collective predictive power. Among patients with negative CSFTT outcomes or subpar VPS surgery responses, distinct cortical variations emerged, particularly in the caudal middle frontal, rostral middle frontal, superior frontal, and superior parietal regions. Our Super Learner model, integrating CSF dynamics and cortical thickness data, achieved a 90% positive predictive value, signifying a tangible advancement over traditional measures. Analyzing preoperative cortical thickness emerges as a viable strategy for streamlining therapeutic decisions for potential iNPH patients. Future endeavors should focus on large-scale multicentric studies to further delineate specific cortical thickness patterns, potentially enhancing the prediction accuracy for VPS surgery outcomes.

Indexed as

Brain Cortical ThicknessCerebral CortexCerebrospinal FluidHydrocephalus, Normal PressureAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMachine LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedVentriculoperitoneal ShuntArtificial intelligenceCortical thicknessNormal pressure hydrocephalus

Identifiers

PMID41806201
PMCPMC12975843

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.