ArticleScientific reports2020
Navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as preoperative assessment in patients with brain tumors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An update on tests used for intraoperative monitoring of cognition during awake craniotomy.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Pooled it
- Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (nTMS): From Functional Brain Mapping to Clinical Applications in Neurosurgery and Neurology.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Causal parametric language mapping with electrical stimulation during awake neurosurgery.Science advances · 2026Article
- Preoperative and intraoperative neuromonitoring and mapping techniques impact oncological and functional outcomes in supratentorial function-eloquent brain tumours: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Therapeutic effect of iturin A onAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024Article
- Preoperative mapping techniques for brain tumor surgery: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (nTMS) based Preoperative Planning for Brain Tumor Treatment.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2024Review
- Brain imaging and morphological plasticity in glioblastoma: a literature review.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Review
- Imaging features of localized IDH wild-type histologically diffuse astrocytomas: a single-institution case series.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Preoperative Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: New Insight for Brain Tumor-Related Language Mapping.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Impact of the extent of resection on the survival of patients with grade II and III gliomas using awake brain mapping.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2021Article
- Lower-Grade Gliomas: An Epidemiological Voxel-Based Analysis of Location and Proximity to Eloquent Regions.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Review
- What Direct Electrostimulation of the Brain Taught Us About the Human Connectome: A Three-Level Model of Neural Disruption.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- Can Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Be Considered to Facilitate Reoperation for Low-Grade Glioma Relapse by Eliciting Neuroplasticity?Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Newly discovered neuron-to-glioma communication: new noninvasive therapeutic opportunities on the horizon?Neuro-oncology advancesReview
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
We aimed to investigate clinical parameters that affected the results of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (nrTMS) language mapping by comparing the results of preoperative nrTMS language mapping with those of direct cortical stimulation (DCS) mapping. In the prospective, non-randomized study, patients had to meet all of the following inclusion criteria: the presence of left- or right-side brain tumors in the vicinity of or inside the areas anatomically associated with language functions; awake brain surgery scheduled; and age >18 years. Sixty one patients were enrolled, and this study included 42 low-grade gliomas and 19 high-grade gliomas (39 men, 22 women; mean age, 41.1 years, range 18-72 years). The tumor was located in the left and right hemisphere in 50 (82.0%) and 11 (18.0%) patients, respectively. In the 50 patients with left-side gliomas, nrTMS language mapping showed 81.6% sensitivity, 59.6% specificity, 78.5% positive predictive value, and 64.1% negative predictive value when compared with the respective DCS values for detecting language sites in all regions. We then investigated how some parameters, including age, tumor type, tumor volume, and the involvement of anatomical language-related regions, affected different subpopulations. Based on the receiver operating curve statistics, subgroup analysis showed that the non-involvement of language-related regions afforded significantly better the area under the curve (AUC) values (AUC = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74-0.88) than the involvement of language-related regions (AUC = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.50-0.67; p < 0.0001). Our findings suggest that nrTMS language mapping could be a reliable method, particularly in obtaining responses for cases without tumor-involvement of classical perisylvian language areas.
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.