MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/s1474-4422(18)30033-4

Медицинская библиотека · The Lancet. Neurology · 2018

Technological advances and changing indications for lumbar puncture in neurological disorders.

Costerus Joost M, Brouwer Matthijs C, van de Beek Diederik

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Technological advances have changed the indications for and the way in which lumbar puncture is done. Suspected CNS infection remains the most common indication for lumbar puncture, but new molecular techniques have broadened CSF analysis indications, such as the determination of neuronal autoantibodies in autoimmune encephalitis. New screening techniques have increased sensitvity for pathogen detection and can be used to identify pathogens that were previously unknown to cause CNS infections. Evidence suggests that potential treatments for neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, will rely on early detection of the disease with the use of CSF biomarkers. In addition to being used as a diagnostic tool, lumbar puncture can also be used to administer intrathecal treatments as shown by studies of antisense oligonucleotides in patients with spinal muscular atrophy. Lumbar puncture is generally a safe procedure but complications can occur, ranging from minor (eg, back pain) to potentially devastating (eg, cerebral herniation). Evidence that an atraumatic needle tip design reduces complications of lumbar puncture is compelling, and reinforces the need to change clinical practice.

Для цитирования: Costerus Joost M, Brouwer Matthijs C, van de Beek Diederik. Technological advances and changing indications for lumbar puncture in neurological disorders.. The Lancet. Neurology. 2018. DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(18)30033-4.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.