ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2022
Endoscopic surgery for intraventricular hemorrhage: A comparative study and single center surgical experience.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of neuroendoscopic drainage in intraventricular hemorrhage: an updated meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Minimal-access exoscopic approach for caudate hemorrhage with intraventricular extension using the ViewSite Brain Access System.Surgical neurology international · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted stereotactic minimally invasive aspiration and irrigation (RASMIAI): a novel approach for severe intraventricular hemorrhage.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Technical considerations of neuroendoscopic management of obstructive hydrocephalus secondary to intraventricular hemorrhage.Surgical neurology international · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraventricular hemorrhage is a neurosurgical emergency, and a dangerous condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Previously, hematoma evacuation is generally executed by external intracranial drainage (EVD) or surgical evacuation. Nowadays, endoscopic evacuation is emerging as a good alternative because it brings relatively less invasion and injury. However, successful endoscopic evacuation requires skilled manipulation of endoscopic devices and the evidence supporting its efficacy differs in different reports.
aimTo improve the technique usage and provide more evidence of endoscopic evacuation efficacy, we summarize our surgical experience and compared the outcomes of the endoscopic evacuation with EVD using real-world data.
methodsWe retrospectively studied 96 consecutive patients with intraventricular hemorrhage who underwent either endoscopic surgery (
resultsPatients in the endoscopic and non-endoscopic groups presented with a similar state of consciousness, with a comparable Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) index. The average operation time of the endoscopic group was longer than that of the non-endoscopic group (median 2.42 h
conclusionEndoscopic evacuation of intraventricular hemorrhage was generally an effective and efficient way for hemorrhage evacuation, and contributed remarkably to the improvement of consciousness in patients with intraventricular hemorrhage.
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.