Ventriculoperitoneal shunt versus transverse sinus stenting in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Intracranial pressure dropped significantly after transverse sinus stenting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension
Ventriculoperitoneal shunt versus transverse sinus stenting in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (intracranial hypertension) is characterized by elevated intracranial pressure with risk of visual impairment.
This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251050247).
intracranial pressure fell sharply after stenting
Visual improvement occurred in 83.9% of patients, with no significant difference between transverse sinus stenting (84.1%) and ventriculoperitoneal shunting (83.3%) ( p = 0.933).
Headache improvement was observed in 73.6%, with no significant between-group difference ( p = 0.628).
Complication rates were low overall (0.1%), although the higher reported rate with transverse sinus stenting (1.56%) than ventriculoperitoneal shunting (approximately 0%) most likely reflects inconsistent complication definitions and incomplete event capture rather than a true procedural risk difference.
Ventriculoperitoneal shunting and transverse sinus stenting provide comparable clinical outcomes in intracranial hypertension.
transverse sinus stenting demonstrated numerically lower revision rates, although without statistical significance.
These findings should be interpreted cautiously because the available evidence is derived predominantly from non-randomized, indirect comparisons with substantial indication bias, and the treatment groups likely differed systematically at baseline.
Prospective phenotype-guided comparative studies are needed to better define the optimal surgical strategy.