ArticleComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022
A Retrospective Cohort Study of Neuroendoscopic Surgery versus Traditional Craniotomy on Surgical Success Rate, Postoperative Complications, and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.
Article in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and Safety of Neuroendoscopy versus Craniotomy for Spontaneous Supratentorial Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Non-Randomized Studies.Brain and behavior · 2025Pooled it
- Full Visualization of Contact Endoscopy for Basal Ganglia Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Comparing With Microscopy and Neuroendoscopy.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Neuroendoscopy for acute severe neurological conditions: high hematoma clearance and rapid recovery in 815 patients - cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
- Effect of early stepwise controlled decompression combined with mild hypothermia therapy on efficacy, cerebral edema volume, and serum biochemical indices in patients with severe hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Cerebrospinal Fluid from Patients After Craniotomy with the Appearance of Interleukin-6 Storm Can Activate Microglia to Damage the Hypothalamic Neurons in Mice.Molecular neurobiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Safety and technical efficacy of early minimally invasive endoscopy-guided surgery for intracerebral haemorrhage: the Dutch Intracerebral haemorrhage Surgery Trial pilot study.Acta neurochirurgica · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A case-control study was adopted to explore the effect of neuroendoscopy compared with traditional craniotomy on the success rate, postoperative complications, and prognosis of patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Methods: The clinical data of 106 patients with ICH treated in our hospital from March 2019 to June 2021 were collected and analyzed retrospectively and divided into two groups according to different treatment methods. The patients who were cured by craniotomy were in the control group ( Results: In comparison with groups, the effective rate of treatment in the research group was higher, and the difference between groups was statistically significant ( Conclusion: Compared with conventional craniotomy, neuroendoscopic surgery can remarkably reduce the operation time and blood loss, enhance the hematoma clearance rate, and have a better prognosis, which is more conducive to the recovery of postoperative neurological function, life activities, and quality of life of patients.
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.