ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2022
Stimulated Raman histology facilitates accurate diagnosis in neurosurgical patients: a one-to-one noninferiority study.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stimulated Raman Spectroscopy for Intraoperative Glioblastoma Diagnosis-A Complementary Tool to Frozen Section?Cancers · 2026Article
- Review
- Image Quality Assessment and Reliability Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Based Tumor Classification of Stimulated Raman Histology of Tumor Biobank Samples.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Current Applications of Raman Spectroscopy in Intraoperative Neurosurgery.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- [Intraoperative stimulated Raman histology for personalized brain tumor surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- In vivo organoid growth monitoring by stimulated Raman histology.Npj imaging · 2024Article
- Advances in Intraoperative Glioma Tissue Sampling and Infiltration Assessment.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Raman spectroscopy: A prospective intraoperative visualization technique for gliomas.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveStimulated Raman histology (SRH) offers efficient and accurate intraoperative neuropathological tissue analysis without procedural alteration to the diagnostic specimen. However, there are limited data demonstrating one-to-one tissue comparisons between SRH and traditional frozen sectioning. This study explores the non-inferiority of SRH as compared to frozen section on the same piece of tissue in neurosurgical patients.
methodsTissue was collected over a 1-month period from 18 patients who underwent resection of central nervous system lesions. SRH and frozen section analyses were compared for diagnostic capabilities as well as assessed for quality and condition of tissue via a survey completed by pathologists.
resultsSRH was sufficient for diagnosis in 78% of specimens as compared to 94% of specimens by frozen section of the same specimen. A Fisher's exact test determined there was no significant difference in diagnostic capability between the two groups. Additionally, both quality of SRH and condition of tissue after SRH were deemed to be non-inferior to frozen section.
conclusionsThis study provides further evidence for the non-inferiority of SRH techniques. It is also the first study to demonstrate SRH accuracy using one-to-one tissue analysis in neuropathological specimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35764906What 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.