ArticleActa neurochirurgica2022
Endoscopic endonasal transmaxillary-pterygoid approach for skull-base non-vestibular schwannomas in 10 consecutive patients.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic endonasal resection of transinfundibular craniopharyngiomas using a vertical infundibular split with subpial excavation: Case instruction and operative video.Surgical neurology international · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Endonasal Transnasopharyngeal Approach for Ventral Craniovertebral Junction Lesions: A Technical Note.Neurospine · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNon-vestibular schwannomas (NVSs) of the skull base occur in several sites, and few previous studies have evaluated the usefulness of the endoscopic endonasal transmaxillary-pterygoid approach (EETMPA) to resect these lesions. We aimed to evaluate the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent EETMPA for skull-base NVSs and to investigate the efficacy, safety, and indications for the procedure.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 10 consecutive patients (mean age, 45 ± 17) who underwent EETMPA for skull-base NVSs at the University of Tsukuba hospital between 2013 and 2020. We also calculated the total tumor volume and the size of the corridor to the tumor for EEA (SCEEA) in nine patients who underwent EEA for NVSs adjacent to the Meckel's cave or cavernous sinus.
resultsNine patients (9/10), including five women (5/10), underwent primary surgery. Gross total resection and subtotal resection were achieved in five patients each (5/10). Postoperatively, one patient showed a new and mild cranial nerve V sensory deficit and one patient showed slight worsening of abducens nerve palsy. The greater palatine nerve was amputated in two patients; however, permanent perception loss in the soft palate was observed in one patient. The Vidian nerve was sacrificed in four patients, and new dry eye occurred in one patient. None of the patients experienced postoperative tumor recurrence or regrowth during the follow-up period of 40 ± 28 months.
conclusionEETMPA is safe and effective for excising skull-base NVSs which are not eligible for radiosurgery leading to a high rate of successful resection and a high rate of but mild neurological sequela. The EEA is appropriate when the tumor extends to the paranasal sinus with sufficient SCEEA.
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.