Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337683›Full record

ArticleNeurosurgical review2022

What is the current clinical practice in pituitary adenoma surgery in Europe? European Pituitary Adenoma Surgery Survey (EU-PASS) results-technical part.

Martin Májovský, Andre Grotenhuis, Nicolas Foroglou, Francesco Zenga, Sebastien Froehlich, Florian Ringel, Nicolas Sampron, Nick Thomas, Martin Komarc, David Netuka

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Martin MájovskýDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. martin.majovsky@uvn.cz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7725-5181
Andre GrotenhuisNeurosurgery Department, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Nicolas Foroglou1St Department of Neurosurgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Francesco ZengaNeurosurgery Unit, Department of Neuroscience "Rita Levi Montalcini", University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Sebastien FroehlichDepartment of Neurosurgery, Lariboisière University Hospital, Paris, France.
Florian RingelDepartment of Neurosurgery, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Nicolas SampronNeurosurgery Department, University Hospital Donostia, San Sebastian, Spain.
Nick ThomasDepartment of Neurosurgery, King's College, London, UK.
Martin KomarcInstitute of Biophysics and Informatics, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
David NetukaDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pituitary adenoma surgery has evolved rapidly in recent decades, changing clinical practice markedly and raising new challenges. There is no current consensus or guidelines for perioperative care that includes possible complication management. This study aims to determine current practice across European neurosurgical centres. We created a list of eligible departments performing pituitary adenoma surgery based on cooperation with EANS, national neurosurgical societies, and personal communication with local neurosurgeons. We contacted the chairpersons from each department and asked them (or another responsible neurosurgeon) to fill out the survey. The survey consisted of 58 questions. For further analysis, departments were divided into subgroups: "academic"/ "non-academic centre", "high-volume"/"low-volume", "mainly endoscopic"/ "mainly microscopic"/ "mixed practise", and by geographical regions. Data from 254 departments from 34 countries were obtained. The average time to complete the survey was 18 min. Notably, the endoscopic approach is the predominant surgical approach in Europe, used in 56.8% of the centres. In routine cases without intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak, high-volume centres are less pedantic with sellar closure when compared with low-volume centres (p < 0.001). On the other hand, when a postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak occurs, high-volume centres are more active and indicate early reoperation (p = 0.013). Less than 15% of the participating centres perform early postoperative MRI scans. Marked variation was noted among different groups of respondents and some contentious issues are discussed. Such information can encourage useful debate about the reasons for the variations seen and perhaps help develop standardised protocols to improve patient outcomes. A future research focus is to compare European results with other regions.

Indexed as

AdenomaPituitary NeoplasmsCerebrospinal Fluid LeakEndoscopyHumansRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesEndocrinologyNeurosurgeryPituitary adenomaSurvey

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.