Evidence Hub

Temporal and regional trends in the diagnosis and treatment of spontaneous intracranial hypotension: a systematic review

Ha WS, Choi S, Kang MK, Kim HY, Cho SJ, Kim SK, Lee MJ

The journal of headache and pain, 2026

2 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) is an underrecognized condition with rapidly evolving diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. This study investigated temporal and regional trends in diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for SIH in the published literature. METHODS: We systematically reviewed SIH-related clinical studies in PubMed from inception through December 2024. Data on study site (continent/country/institute) and diagnostic and treatment modalities used in clinical settings were extracted. To assess temporal and regional trends, the reported use of each modality was analyzed over 5-year intervals and across regions, separately for case reports and original articles, which respectively reflect real-world and research settings. RESULTS: A total of 789 articles (529 case reports and 260 original articles) were included. In case reports, brain MRI (84.4%), lumbar puncture (84.4%), and RI cisternography (50%) were the most frequently used diagnostics in 1990–1999, while brain MRI (91.1%) and spine MRI (74.8%) became predominant in 2020–2024. The use of lumbar puncture and RI cisternography declined to 24.4% and 5.9%, respectively, while dynamic CT myelography (18.5%) and digital subtraction myelography (23.7%) became more common in 2020–2024. Conservative management (81.3%) was the most common treatment in 1990–1999, while surgical repair increased to 39.8% in 2020–2024. Similar trends were observed in original articles. These temporal trends were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free