ArticleChinese neurosurgical journal2022
Minimally invasive keyhole techniques for resection of giant intracranial tumors.
Article in Chinese neurosurgical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile keyhole neurosurgery is increasingly utilized in the operating room, there are few reports regarding the use of keyhole techniques to resect giant intracranial tumors. The feasibility and technique of that were discussed in this paper.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 95 consecutive patients who were admitted to our service between February 2012 and September 2017 with a maximum intracranial tumor diameter >5 cm. Keyhole approaches were used to resect these tumors in each case, including supraorbital, subtemporal, suboccipital, retromastoid, frontal, temporal, occipital, parietal, pterional, a combined temporo-parietal keyhole approach, and an approach via the longitudinal fissure.
resultsWe achieved gross total resection in 68/95 cases (71.6%) and subtotal resection in 27/95 cases (28.4%). No surgical death or severe disabilities such as coma and limb dyskinesia occurred following surgery. At the time of discharge, 8 patients had complications related to impaired cranial nerve function. In addition, 2 patients developed hydrocephalus requiring ventriculo-peritoneal shunt placement, and 4 patients developed a postoperative CSF leak requiring surgical intervention.
conclusionWith meticulous design and reasonable selection, resection of giant intracranial tumors utilizing minimally invasive keyhole approaches can be done safely with satisfactory surgical outcomes.
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.