OBJECTIVE: Reliable tools are lacking to predict shunt-dependent hydrocephalus (SDHC) development after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Quantitative volumetric measurement of hemorrhagic blood is a good predictor of SDHC but might be impractical in the clinical setting. Qualitative assessment performed using scales such as the modified Fisher scale (mFisher) and the original Graeb scale (oGraeb) is easier to conduct but provides limited predictive power. In between, the modified Graeb scale (mGraeb) keeps the simplicity of the qualitative scales yet adds assessment of acute hydrocephalus, which might improve SDHC-predicting capabilities. In this study the authors investigated the likely capabilities of the mGraeb and compared them with previously validated methods. This research also aimed to define a tailored mGraeb cutoff point for SDHC prediction.METHODS: The authors performed retrospective analysis of patients admitted to their institution with the diagnosis of aSAH between May 2013 and April 2016. Out of 168 patients, 78 were included for analysis after the application of predefined exclusion criteria. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate the use of all 4 methods (quantitative volumetric assessment and the mFisher, oGraeb, and mGraeb scales) to predict the likelihood of SDHC development based on clinical data and blood amount assessment on initial CT scans.RESULTS: The mGraeb scale was demonstrated to be the most robust predictor of SDHC, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.848 (95% CI 0.763–0.933). According to the AUC results, the performance of the mGraeb scale was significantly better than that of the oGraeb scale (χ² = 4.49; p = 0.034) and mFisher scale (χ² = 7.21; p = 0.007). No statistical difference was found between the AUCs of the mGraeb and the quantitative volumetric measurement models (χ² = 12.76; p = 0.23), but mGraeb proved to be the simplest model since it showed the lowest Akaike information criterion (66.4), the lowest Bayesian information criterion (71.2), and the highest R²_Nagelkerke coefficient (39.7%). The initial mGraeb showed more than 85% specificity for predicting the development of SDHC in patients presenting with a score of 12 or more points.CONCLUSIONS: According to the authors’ data, the mGraeb scale is the simplest model that correlates well with SDHC development. Due to limited scientific evidence of treatments aimed at SDHC prevention, we propose an mGraeb score higher than 12 to identify patients at risk with high specificity. This mGraeb cutoff point might also serve as a useful prognostic tool since patients with SDHC after aSAH have worse functional outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The percentage of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research might be perceived as a representation of our specialty and may influence the perpetuation of the existing gender gap. This study investigated whether the trend in women taking lead roles in neurosurgical research has mirrored the increase in female neurosurgeons during the past decade and whether our most prestigious publications portray enough female role models to stimulate gender diversity among the new generation of neurosurgeons. METHODS: Two of the most prominent neurosurgical journals —Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery— were selected for this study, and every original article that was published in 2009 and 2019 in each of those journals was investigated according to the gender of the first and senior authors, their academic titles, their affiliations, and their institutions’ region. RESULTS: A total of 1328 articles were analyzed. The percentage of female authors was significantly higher in Europe and Russia compared with the US and Canada (first authors: 60/302 [19.9%] vs 109/829 [13.1%], p = 0.005; and senior authors: 32/302 [10.6%] vs 57/829 [6.9%], p = 0.040). Significantly increased female authorship was observed from 2009 to 2019, and overall numbers of both first and senior female authors almost doubled. However, when analyzing by regions, female authorship increased significantly only in the US and Canada. Female authors of neurosurgical research articles were significantly less likely to hold an MD degree compared with men. Female neurosurgeons serving as senior authors were represented in only 3.6% (48/1328) of articles. Women serving as senior authors were more likely to have a female colleague listed as the first author of their research (29/97 [29.9%] vs 155/1231 [12.6%]; χ ² = 22.561, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although this work showed an encouraging increase in the number of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research, the stagnant trend in Europe may suggest that a glass ceiling has been reached and further advances in equity would require more aggressive measures. The differences in the researchers’ profiles (academic title and affiliation) suggest an even wider gender gap. Cultural unconscious bias may explain why female senior authors have more than double the number of women serving as their junior authors compared with men. While changes in the workforce happen, strategies such as publishing specific issues on women, encouraging female editorials, and working toward more gender-balanced editorial boards may help our journals to portray a more equitable specialty that would not discourage bright female candidates.

Neurosurgery is one of the most demanding medical specialties. For neurosurgeons, balancing professional activity with personal life can be challenging. To evaluate gender differences in contribution of neurosurgeons in the household and child-rearing, as well as their impact on personal life and career. An anonymous, electronic, 59-item web-based survey was administered to National Neurosurgical Societies of Europe, and European Member Societies of the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies (June–October 2021). A total of 205 European neurosurgeons (87 females and 118 males, mean age 40.7) are included in our survey. In neurosurgery, females are significantly more likely to be alone (37.9%), while males are significantly more likely to have children (66.9%). In terms of household efforts, females spend more time than males on the same tasks. Most participants (71.2%) view gender issues as a disadvantage in career pursuing. Women feel less accepted (54.3%) and having fewer opportunities (58.6%), while men believe that pregnancy/child-rearing (65.8%) and having many roles (51.3%) are the main obstacles. Both genders (77.6%) favor more convenient working conditions for young parents. Discussion and Conclusion. In our study we found that, women neurosurgeons take more responsibilities at home, especially in the child-rearing years. Female neurosurgeons are more likely to live alone or stay childless more often compared to their male colleagues. Supportive facilities, flexible programs, universal life policies and presumably curbing of the social stereotypes are of importance to overcome gender inequities that women are still facing in neurosurgery.