Utility of Transcranial Doppler in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) can be an elusive diagnosis, and poor visual outcomes may occur. Currently, the only means of accurately diagnosing and following these patients is with repeated lumbar puncture. Previous work has shown that transcranial doppler measurements of pulsatility correlate accurately with elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). This study is designed to assess whether pulsatility index (PI) correlates with ICP in patients newly diagnosed with IIH. METHODS: Seven patients with clinical suspicion of IIH were included in this study. Clinical suspicion was based on history of recurrent headaches and papilledema. All patients had otherwise normal examinations and imaging. Middle cerebral arteries were insonated to obtain average PI values. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was then withdrawn, and closing pressures were recorded. Pulsatility index values were then obtained again, within ten minutes after completing CSF withdrawal. PI values were correlated with ICP values, and pre and post CSF withdrawal values were compared. RESULTS: All seven patients had elevated opening pressures (average 39 cm H2O, range 27-70). The average closing pressure after approximately 30 cc of CSF withdrawal was 11.9 cm H2O. The average PI before CSF withdrawal was 0.95, which dropped to 0.70 after CSF withdrawal (p = 0.02). The change in ICP was found to be correlated with a change in PI (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that PI may be useful for following patients with IIH non-invasively. Further study with larger groups and blinded assessments should be useful in better characterizing the accuracy of this technique.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".