Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33523284›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2021

Postoperative headache after surgical treatment of cerebellopontine angle tumors: a systematic review.

Louis Pogoda, Jelle S Nijdam, Diederik P J Smeeing, Eduard H J Voormolen, Fuat Ziylan, Hans G X M Thomeer

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Louis PogodaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6735-508X
Jelle S NijdamDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Diederik P J SmeeingDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Eduard H J VoormolenDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Fuat ZiylanDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hans G X M ThomeerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. H.G.X.M.Thomeer@umcutrecht.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePostoperative headache (POH) is a complication that occurs after surgical resection of cerebellopontine angle (CPA) tumors. The two most common surgical approaches are the translabyrinthine (TL), and retrosigmoid (RS) approach. The objective of this systematic review was to investigate whether POH occurs more frequently after RS compared to TL approaches.

methodsA systematic search was conducted in Cochrane, Pubmed and Embase. Studies were included if POH after CPA tumor removal was reported and both surgical approaches were compared. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.

resultsIn total, 3,942 unique articles were screened by title and abstract. After the initial screening process 63 articles were screened for relevance to the inquiry, of which seven studies were included. Three studies found no significant difference between both surgical approaches (p = 0.871, p = 0.120, p = 0.592). Three other studies found a lower rate of POH in the TL group compared to the RS group (p = 0.019, p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Another study showed a significantly lower POH rate in the TL group after one and six months (p = 0.006), but not after 1 year (p = 0.6).

conclusionThe results of this systematic review show some evidence of a lower rate of POH in favor of the TL approach versus the RS approach for CPA tumor resection. Prospective research studies are needed to further investigate this finding.

Indexed as

Neuroma, AcousticPostoperative ComplicationsCerebellopontine AngleHeadacheHumansNeurosurgical ProceduresCerebellopontine angle tumorsPostoperative headacheRetrosigmoid approachSurgical techniquesTranslabyrinthine approachVestibular schwannoma

Identifiers

PMID33523284
PMCPMC8382607

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.