Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28916976›Full record

SynthesisPituitary2018

Preoperative risk factors for postoperative complications in endoscopic pituitary surgery: a systematic review.

Daniel J Lobatto, Friso de Vries, Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi, Alberto M Pereira, Wilco C Peul, Thea P M Vliet Vlieland, Nienke R Biermasz, Wouter R van Furth

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pituitary, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Tips and Tricks to Safely Perform an Endoscopic Endonasal Trans-Sphenoidal Pituitary Surgery: A Surgeon's Checklist.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2023
    Article
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel J LobattoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands. d.j.lobatto@lumc.nl.
Friso de VriesDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Amir H Zamanipoor NajafabadiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Alberto M PereiraDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Wilco C PeulDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Thea P M Vliet VlielandDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Nienke R BiermaszDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Wouter R van FurthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ability to preoperatively predict postoperative complication risks is valuable for individual counseling and (post)operative planning, e.g. to select low-risk patients eligible for short stay surgery or those with higher risks requiring special attention. These risks however, are not well established in pituitary surgery.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of associations between preoperative characteristics and postoperative complications of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery according to the PRISMA guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed through the QUIPS tool.

resultsIn total 23 articles were included, containing 5491 patients (96% pituitary adenoma). There was a wide variety regarding the nature and number of risk factors, definitions, measurement and statistics employed, and overall quality of mainly retrospective studies was low. Consistent significant associations were older age for complications in general, and intraventricular extension for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks. Associations identified in some but not all studies were younger age, increased BMI, female gender, and learning curve for CSF leaks; increased tumor size for complications in general; and Rathke's cleft cysts for diabetes insipidus. Mortality (incidence rate 1%) was not addressed as a risk factor.

conclusionBased on current literature, of low to medium quality, it is not possible to comprehensively quantify risk factors for complications. Nevertheless, older age and intraventricular extension were associated with increased postoperative complications. Future research should aim at prospective data collection, reporting of outcomes, and uniformity of definitions. Only then a proper risk analysis can be performed for endoscopic pituitary surgery.

Indexed as

Age FactorsEndoscopyHumansNeurosurgical ProceduresPituitary NeoplasmsPostoperative ComplicationsRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeBleedingCSF leakDiabetes insipidusEndoscopic transsphenoidal surgeryPituitaryRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID28916976
PMCPMC5767215
OpenAlexW2755566641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.