ArticleBrain sciences2022
The Surgical Risk Factors of Giant Intracranial Meningiomas: A Multi-Centric Retrospective Analysis of Large Case Serie.
Article in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Giant Right Sphenoid Wing Meningioma as a Reversible Frontal Network Lesion: A Pseudo-bvFTD Case with Venous-Sparing Skull-Base Resection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Giant atypical meningioma diagnosis and clinical treatment: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Editorial: Frontiers in Neuro Oncology and Neurosurgery.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Giant intracranial meningiomas (GIMs) are a subgroup of meningiomas with huge dimensions with a maximum diameter of more than 5 cm. The mechanisms by which a meningioma can grow to be defined as a “giant” are unknown, and the biological, radiological profile and the different outcomes are poorly investigated. We performed a multi-centric retrospective study of a series of surgically treated patients suffering from intracranial meningioma. All the patients were assigned on the grounds of the preoperative imaging to giant and medium/large meningioma groups with a cut-off of 5 cm. We investigated whether the presence of large diameter and peritumoral brain edema (PBE) on radiological diagnosis indicates different mortality rates, grading, characteristics, and outcomes in a multi-variate analysis. We found a higher risk of developing complications for GIMs (29.9% versus 14.8%; p < 0.01). The direct proportional relationship between PBE volume and tumor volume was present only in the medium/large group (Pearson correlation with p < 0.01) and not in the GIM group (p = 0.47). In conclusion, GIMs have a higher risk of developing complications in the postoperative phase than medium/large meningioma without higher risk of mortality and recurrence.
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.