SynthesisMedicine2019
Factors associated with postoperative outcomes in patients with intramedullary Grade II ependymomas: A Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of MRI patterns in predicting neurologic deficits in spinal ependymomas.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Multisegmental versus monosegmental intramedullary spinal cord ependymomas: perioperative neurological functions and surgical outcomes.Neurosurgical review · 2022Article
- Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of ependymomas in the upper cervical spinal cord: a single-center experience of 155 consecutive patients.Neurosurgical review · 2021Article
- Surgical outcome and prognostic factors in spinal cord ependymoma: a single-center, long-term follow-up study.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2021Article
- Correlation of Intraoperative Neurophysiological Parameters and Outcomes in Patients with Intramedullary Tumors.Asian journal of neurosurgeryArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost of the previous studies combined all types of intramedullary ependymomas without providing accurate pathological subtypes. In addition, it was very difficult to evaluate the factors associated with postoperative outcomes of patients with different pathological subtypes of intramedullary Grade II ependymomas by traditional meta-analysis. This study evaluated the factors related with postoperative outcomes of patients with intramedullary Grade II ependymomas.
methodsIndividual patient data analysis was performed using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search included articles published up to April 2018 with no lower date limit on the search results. The topics were intramedullary Grade II ependymomas. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log-rank test). The level of significance was set at P < .05.
resultsA total of 21 studies with 70 patients were included in this article. PFS of patients who underwent total resection was much longer than the PFS of those who received subtotal resection (P < .001). Patients who received adjuvant therapy (P = .005) or radiotherapy and chemotherapy (P < .001) seemed to have shorter PFS than others; PFS of patients who had cerebrospinal fluid disease dissemination (P = .022) or scoliosis (P = .001) were significantly shorter than others. OS of cellular ependymoma patients was less than giant cell ependymoma patients (P < .001).
conclusionsPFS of patients who received total resection was much longer than those who received subtotal resection. Patients treated with adjuvant therapy or radiotherapy and chemotherapy appeared to have shorter PFS than others; PFS of patients with cerebrospinal fluid disease dissemination or scoliosis were significantly shorter than others. Cellular ependymomas would have better OS than giant cell ependymoma. However, giant cell ependymoma patients might have the worst OS.
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.