Observational studySao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina
Surgical treatment of neurocysticercosis. Retrospective cohort study and an illustrative case report.
Observational study in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current Role of Surgery in the Treatment of Neurocysticercosis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Surgical nuances of giant neurocysticercosis according to intracranial location in the Southwest region of the Dominican Republic, presentation of cases, and literature review.Surgical neurology international · 2023Article
- Transventricular endoscopic approach to the anterior interhemispheric fissure for neurocysticercosis: illustrative cases.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2022Article
- Neurocysticercosis: A Review into Treatment Options, Indications, and Their Efficacy.Research and reports in tropical medicine · 2022Review
- Nonspecific dizziness as an unusual presentation of neurocysticercosis: A case report.Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CONTEXT AND
objective: Neurocysticercosis is prevalent in developing countries and manifests with several neurological signs and symptoms that may be fatal. The cysts may be parenchymal or extraparenchymal and therefore several signs and symptoms may occur. Depending on their location, neurosurgical procedures may be required, sometimes as emergencies. The aim here was to review 10-year statistics on all surgical neurocysticercosis cases at a large public tertiary-level hospital. DESIGN AND
setting: Retrospective cohort at a large public tertiary-level hospital.
methods: All surgical neurocysticercosis cases seen between July 2006 and July 2016 were reviewed. Parenchymal and extraparenchymal forms were considered, along with every type of surgical procedure (shunt, endoscopic third ventriculostomy and craniotomy). The literature was reviewed through PubMed, using the terms "neurocysticercosis", "surgery", "shunt" and "hydrocephalus".
results: 37 patients underwent neurosurgical procedures during the study period. Most were male (62.16%) and extraparenchymal cases predominated (81%). Patients aged 41 to 50 years were most affected (35.13%) and those 20 years or under were unaffected. Ventricular forms were most frequently associated with hydrocephalus and required permanent shunts in most cases (56.57%).
conclusions: The treatment of neurocysticercosis depends on the impairment: the parenchymal type usually does not require surgery, which is more common in the extraparenchymal form. Hydrocephalus is a frequent complication because the cysts often obstruct the cerebrospinal flow. The cysts should be removed whenever possible, to avoid the need for permanent shunts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.