ArticleNeurosurgical review2016
A retrospective and consecutive analysis of the epidemiology and management of spinal cavernomas over the last 20 years in a single center.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Reporting practices of baseline and surgical variables in spinal cavernous malformation surgery: a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review on the outcome of intramedullary spinal cord cavernous malformations.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022Pooled it
- Spinal Cavernous Malformations: A Narrative Review.NeuroSci · 2026Review
- Spinal Intramedullary Tumors.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Review
- [Prognosis of patients with spinal intramedullary cavernous hemangioma by different treatments].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2023Article
- Prediction of outcomes for symptomatic spinal cavernous malformation surgery: a multicenter prospective clinical study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Observational
- Intramedullary spinal cord cavernous malformations-association between intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring changes and neurological outcome.Acta neurochirurgica · 2022Article
- Article
- Spinal Cavernomas: Outcome of Surgically Treated 10 Patients.Frontiers in neurology · 2017Article
- MR imaging features that distinguish spinal cavernous angioma from hemorrhagic ependymoma and serial MRI changes in cavernous angioma.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cavernous malformations (SCM) are rare lesions often presenting with acute onset of symptoms and progressive neurological deterioration due to hemorrhage into the spinal cord. With the aid of modern techniques, their surgical removal became much safer. The present study was undertaken to analyze the outcome of our series of surgically and conservatively treated patients with SCM. Over a period of 20 years, 20 surgically treated and 5 conservatively managed patients with spinal cavernous malformations were identified and enrolled into this analysis. Demographic data, clinical symptoms, localization and extension of the cavernoma, as well as pre- and postoperative neurological status were obtained. The clinical status was assessed using the Frankel score. Patients were followed up clinically and by MRI. Before surgery, 90% (18/20) of our surgical patients were classified as Frankel D (93.8%), whereas two patients (10%) were graded C. None of the patients had a worse Frankel score at the time of discharge. Eighty percent of them (16 cases) remained unchanged, and 20% (4 patients) improved during the first follow-up (mean 6.3 months, range 2-17 months). All improved patients had a superficially located SCM and were operated early (≤3 months). No worsening was observed during extended follow-up (range 9-134 months, mean 44.7 months). Five nonsurgically treated patients showed no significant clinical deterioration over a period of 6.7 years (mean, range 2.9-8 years). SCM localization and number of involved segments had no influence on outcome. Our data show that SCM can be resected with favorable neurological outcome by using intraoperative neuromonitoring. Within the follow-up period, patients treated conservatively remained in a stable neurological condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26627109What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.