Cited by 66Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalusNeurosurgical Procedures and ComplicationsAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

Safety of Lumbar Puncture Procedures in Patients with Alzheimers Disease

Open access
Peskind, E., Nordberg, A., Darreh-Shori, T., Soininen, H.·2009·Current Alzheimer Research

Abstract

Changes in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are representative of biochemical changes in the brain. Collection of CSF by lumbar puncture (LP) is essential for biomarker analysis, which is important for research in neurodegenerative disorders. However, LP for research purposes has been controversial due to a reported high incidence of severe LP headache when using standard 18g or 20g Quincke needles with a beveled cutting tip. A procedural safety analysis was performed using the database of a multicenter, 13-week study of CSF cholinesterase activity. A 24g Sprotte atraumatic needle was used to collect CSF at baseline and at Week 13 from 63 older patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. There was a < 2% LP headache incidence, and a favorable safety profile was reported. In conclusion, LP performed with a 24g Sprotte atraumatic needle (blunt, "bullet" tip) was a well tolerated procedure, with good acceptability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2174/156720509788486509

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peskind, E., Nordberg, A., Darreh-Shori, T., & Soininen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
Corresponding author
Peskind, E.
Venue
Current Alzheimer Research
Published
2009-06-01
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
290-292
ISSN
1567-2050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2128244416
Cited by
66
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Alzheimer Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
  • National Institute on Aging (P50AG005136)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurosurgical Procedures and Complications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
lumbar puncture, Alzheimer's disease, post-dural puncture headache, cerebrospinal fluid collection, atraumatic needles, Sprotte needle, Quincke needle, procedural safety, older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Spinal Puncture, Cohort Studies, Post-Dural Puncture Headache

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review