Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25468012›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2015

Intraoperative assistive technologies and extent of resection in glioma surgery: a systematic review of prospective controlled studies.

Breno José Alencar Pires Barbosa, Eric Domingos Mariano, Chary Marquez Batista, Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie, Manoel Jacobsen Teixeira, Carlos Umberto Pereira, Marcos Soares Tatagiba, Guilherme Alves Lepski

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Neurosurgery for brain metastasis from breast cancer.Translational cancer research · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Intra-operative neurophysiological mapping and monitoring during brain tumour surgery in children: an update.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2016
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Breno José Alencar Pires BarbosaDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Cerqueira Cesar, LIM 15 - 4th floor, São Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Eric Domingos Mariano
Chary Marquez Batista
Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie
Manoel Jacobsen Teixeira
Carlos Umberto Pereira
Marcos Soares Tatagiba
Guilherme Alves Lepski

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies published to date about glioma surgery have addressed the validity of using novel technologies for intraoperative guidance and potentially improved outcomes. However, most of these reports are limited by questionable methods and/or by their retrospective nature. In this work, we performed a systematic review of the literature to address the impact of intraoperative assistive technologies on the extent of resection (EOR) in glioma surgery, compared to conventional unaided surgery. We were also interested in two secondary outcome variables: functional status and progression-free survival. We primarily used PubMed to search for relevant articles. Studies were deemed eligible for our analysis if they (1) were prospective controlled studies; (2) used EOR as their primary target outcome, assessed by MRI volumetric analysis; and (3) had a homogeneous study population with clear inclusion criteria. Out of 493 publications identified in our initial search, only six matched all selection criteria for qualitative synthesis. Currently, the evidence points to 5-ALA, DTI functional neuronavigation, neurophysiological monitoring, and intraoperative MRI as the best tools for improving EOR in glioma surgery. Our sample and conclusions were limited by the fact that studies varied in terms of population characteristics and in their use of different volumetric analyses. We were also limited by the low number of prospective controlled trials available in the literature. Additional evidence-based high-quality studies assessing cost-effectiveness should be conducted to better determine the benefits of intraoperative assistive technologies in glioma surgery.

Indexed as

NeuronavigationSelf-Help DevicesBrain NeoplasmsGliomaHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.