Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32493943›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as preoperative assessment in patients with brain tumors.

Kazuya Motomura, Hiroki Takeuchi, Ippei Nojima, Kosuke Aoki, Lushun Chalise, Kentaro Iijima, Toshihiko Wakabayashi, Atsushi Natsume

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Therapeutic effect of iturin A onAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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.

Kazuya MotomuraDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan. kmotomura@med.nagoya-u.ac.jp.
Hiroki TakeuchiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Higashinagoya National Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Ippei NojimaDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Health Sciences, Shinshu University, Nagano, Japan.
Kosuke AokiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Lushun ChaliseDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Kentaro IijimaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Toshihiko WakabayashiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Atsushi NatsumeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AdolescentAdultAgedBrain MappingBrain NeoplasmsCerebral CortexFemaleGliomaHumansLanguageMaleMiddle AgedNeuronavigationPreoperative CareProspective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID32493943
PMCPMC7270124

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.