MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410326269 · doi:10.1177/08850666251337684

Lumbar Puncture and Brain Herniation in Acute Bacterial Meningitis: An Updated Narrative Review

2025· review· en· W4410326269 on OpenAlexaff
Ari R. Joffe, Fernanda de Marzio Pestana Martins, Daniel Garros, Adrienne Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intensive Care Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLumbar punctureBrain herniationNarrative reviewLumbar disc herniationMeningitisRandomized controlled trialIntensive care medicineObservational studyPsychological interventionAnesthesiaLumbarSurgeryInternal medicineCerebrospinal fluidPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of lumbar puncture (LP) to precipitate brain herniation in acute bacterial meningitis (ABM) was reviewed in this journal in 2007. We report the case of an infant with ABM who had acute apnea requiring intubation and tonic posturing (mistaken for seizure), and then had brain herniation within four hours of an LP. The case prompted this updated narrative review, from 2007 to 2024, focused on the twelve points made in 2007. The review included 14 case reports of brain herniation shortly after LP in ABM, 23 observational studies or systematic reviews, 28 narrative reviews, and 9 guidelines, each with evidence, advice, or recommendations important for the decision to perform LP in ABM. We found evidence to support, and did not find convincing evidence to refute, the twelve points. We found five additional claims made that were meant to refute some of the original points; however, these were based upon data that did not support the claims made. Limitation of the evidence reviewed was the absence of randomized trials to prove whether those patients who herniated may have been destined to herniate regardless of whether they had an LP. Reasons why ABM may be a unique circumstance where normal CT scan cannot determine the risk of herniation after an LP were discussed. We argue that the preponderance of evidence supported the conclusion that, in a patient with strongly suspected ABM who is clinically considered at high risk for herniation, interventions to control ICP and antibiotics administration should be the priority, followed secondarily by an urgent CT scan and, even with a normal CT, not an LP. The case report emphasized that respiratory arrest or suspected tonic seizure can be due to early herniation, and indicate CT scan, and prolonged LP deferral (for 3-4 days) even with a normal CT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intensive Care MedicineSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207