Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35371523›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology practice2022

Global comparison of awake and asleep mapping procedures in glioma surgery: An international multicenter survey.

Jasper K W Gerritsen, Marike L D Broekman, Steven De Vleeschouwer, Philippe Schucht, Christine Jungk, Sandro M Krieg, Brian V Nahed, Mitchel S Berger, Arnaud J P E Vincent

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

9 authors.

Jasper K W GerritsenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4619-865X
Marike L D BroekmanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Steven De VleeschouwerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Philippe SchuchtDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Christine JungkDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Sandro M KriegDepartment of Neurosurgery, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Brian V NahedDepartment of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Mitchel S BergerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Arnaud J P E VincentDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mapping techniques are frequently used to preserve neurological function during glioma surgery. There is, however, no consensus regarding the use of many variables of these techniques. Currently, there are almost no objective data available about potential heterogeneity between surgeons and centers. The goal of this survey is therefore to globally identify, evaluate and analyze the local mapping procedures in glioma surgery. Methods: The survey was distributed to members of the neurosurgical societies of the Netherlands (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Neurochirurgie-NVVN), Europe (European Association of Neurosurgical Societies-EANS), and the United States (Congress of Neurological Surgeons-CNS) between December 2020 and January 2021 with questions about awake mapping, asleep mapping, assessment of neurological morbidity, and decision making. Results: Survey responses were obtained from 212 neurosurgeons from 42 countries. Overall, significant differences were observed for equipment and its settings that are used for both awake and asleep mapping, intraoperative assessment of eloquent areas, the use of surgical adjuncts and monitoring, anesthesia management, assessment of neurological morbidity, and perioperative decision making. Academic practices performed awake and asleep mapping procedures more often and employed a clinical neurophysiologist with telemetric monitoring more frequently. European neurosurgeons differed from US neurosurgeons regarding the modality for cortical/subcortical mapping and awake/asleep mapping, the use of surgical adjuncts, and anesthesia management during awake mapping. Discussion: This survey demonstrates the heterogeneity among surgeons and centers with respect to their procedures for awake mapping, asleep mapping, assessing neurological morbidity, and decision making in glioma patients. These data invite further evaluations for key variables that can be optimized and may therefore benefit from consensus.

Indexed as

awake craniotomygliomaintraoperative stimulation mappingsurvey

Identifiers

PMID35371523
PMCPMC8965050

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.