Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26345667›Full record

ReviewNeurologia medico-chirurgica2015

Current Status of Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery for Skull Base Meningiomas: Review of the Literature.

Masahiro Shin, Kenji Kondo, Nobuhito Saito

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Masahiro ShinDepartment of Neurosurgery, The University of Tokyo Hospital.
Kenji Kondo
Nobuhito Saito
University of Tokyo Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) is expected to be ideal for the paramedian ventral skull base meningiomas, allowing wide access to the ventral skull base regions and realizing early devascularization of the tumor without retraction of the brain. We searched clinical reports of EEA for skull base meningiomas, written in English language, published before October 2014, using the PubMed literature search on the website. Skull base meningiomas are subdivided by the site of occurrence, olfactory groove (8 articles including 80 cases), tuberculum sellae (14 articles, 153 cases), cavernous sinus (2 articles, 8 cases), petroclival region (4 articles, 10 cases), and craniofacial region (2 articles, 5 cases), and the surgical outcomes of EEA were analyzed. In anterior skull base regions, EEA contributed to effective improvement of the symptoms in small and round-shaped meningiomas, but 25% of the patients had postoperative cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea. In cavernous sinus and petroclival regions, successful surgical removal largely depended on tumor consistency, and the extent of the surgical resection proportionally increased the risks of serious complications. Thus, judicious endoscopic resection with adjuvant radiotherapy or radiosurgery remains to be the most reasonable treatment option. To decrease the risks of surgical complications, the surgeons must master the closure techniques of dural defect and meticulous microsurgical procedure under endoscopic vision. Further progress will depend on the progresses of surgical technique in neurosurgeons engaging this potentially "minimally invasive" surgery.

Indexed as

NeuroendoscopyHumansMeningeal NeoplasmsMeningiomaPubMedSkull Base NeoplasmsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26345667
PMCPMC4605081
OpenAlexW2095899206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.