Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33945115›Full record

SynthesisPituitary2021

Impact of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging on gross total resection, extent of resection, and residual tumor volume in pituitary surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Victor E Staartjes, Alex Togni-Pogliorini, Vittorio Stumpo, Carlo Serra, Luca Regli

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pituitary, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A preclinical study of a novel dual-modality contrast agent in rodent models.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Victor E Staartjes *Machine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alex Togni-Pogliorini *Machine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Vittorio StumpoMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Carlo SerraMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland. c.serra@hotmail.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7305-550X
Luca RegliMachine Intelligence in Clinical Neuroscience (MICN) Laboratory, Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResidual tumor tissue after pituitary adenoma surgery, is linked with additional morbidity and mortality. Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (ioMRI) could improve resection. We aim to assess the improvement in gross total resection (GTR), extent of resection (EOR), and residual tumor volume (RV) achieved using ioMRI.

methodsA systematic review was carried out on PubMed/MEDLINE to identify any studies reporting intra- and postoperative (1) GTR, (2) EOR, or (3) RV in patients who underwent resection of pituitary adenomas with ioMRI. Random effects meta-analysis of the rate of improvement after ioMRI for these three surgical outcomes was intended.

resultsAmong 34 included studies (2130 patients), the proportion of patients with conversion to GTR (∆GTR) after ioMRI was 0.19 (95% CI 0.15-0.23). Mean ∆EOR was + 9.07% after ioMRI. Mean ∆RV was 0.784 cm

conclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrates that around one fifth of patients undergoing pituitary adenoma resection convert from non-GTR to GTR after the use of ioMRI. EOR and RV can also be improved to a certain extent using ioMRI. Endoscopic versus microscopic technique or field strength does not appear to alter the impact of ioMRI. Statistical heterogeneity was high, indicating that the improvement in surgical results due to ioMRI varies considerably by center.

Indexed as

AdenomaPituitary NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm, ResidualRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeTumor BurdenAdenomaExtent of resectionGross total resectionImagingIntraoperative magnetic resonance imagingPituitary

Identifiers

PMID33945115
PMCPMC8270798
OpenAlexW3157328174

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.