ArticleJournal of neurosurgery2022
Early repeat resection for residual glioblastoma: decision-making among an international cohort of neurosurgeons.
Article in Journal of neurosurgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can we make it up? - second-look surgery due to post-operative residual tumour in patients diagnosed with diffuse glioma.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Early vs. Late Unplanned Returns to the Operating Room (URTOR) in Neurosurgery: Effect of Surgeon Experience and Complication Types.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- The detrimental effect of biopsy preceding resection in surgically accessible glioblastoma: results from the national cancer database.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Optimizing adjuvant treatment options for patients with glioblastoma.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Impact of extent of resection on outcome from glioblastoma using the RANO resect group classification system: a retrospective, population-based cohort study.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe importance of extent of resection (EOR) in glioblastoma (GBM) has been thoroughly demonstrated. However, few studies have explored the practices and benefits of early repeat resection (ERR) when residual tumor deemed resectable is unintentionally left after an initial resection, and the survival benefit of ERR is still unknown. Herein, the authors aimed to internationally survey current practices regarding ERR and to analyze differences based on geographic location and practice setting.
methodsThe authors distributed a survey to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and Congress of Neurological Surgeons Tumor Section, Society of British Neurological Surgeons, European Association of Neurosurgical Society, and Latin American Federation of Neurosurgical Societies. Neurosurgeons responded to questions about their training, practice setting, and current ERR practices. They also reported the EOR threshold below which they would pursue ERR and their likelihood of performing ERR using a Likert scale of 1-5 (5 being the most likely) in two sets of 5 cases, the first set for a patient's initial hospitalization and the second for a referred patient who had undergone resection elsewhere. The resection likelihood index for each respondent was calculated as the mean Likert score across all cases.
resultsOverall, 180 neurosurgeons from 25 countries responded to the survey. Neurosurgeons performed ERRs very rarely in their practices (< 1% of all GBM cases), with an EOR threshold of 80.2% (75%-95%). When presented with 10 cases, the case context (initial hospitalization vs referred patient) did not significantly change the surgeon ERR likelihood, although ERR likelihood did vary significantly on the basis of tumor location (p < 0.0001). Latin American neurosurgeons were more likely to pursue ERR in the provided cases. Neurosurgeons were more likely to pursue ERR when the tumor was MGMT methylated versus unmethylated, with a resection likelihood index of 3.78 and 3.21, respectively (p = 0.004); however, there was no significant difference between IDH mutant and IDH wild-type tumors.
conclusionsResults of this survey reveal current practices regarding ERR, but they also demonstrate the variability in how neurosurgeons approach ERR. Standardized guidelines based on future studies incorporating tumor molecular characteristics are needed to guide neurosurgeons in their decision-making on this complicated issue.
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.