ArticleBrain tumor research and treatment2022
Surgical Outcomes of Endoscopic Endonasal Versus Transcranial Resections of Adult Craniopharyngioma: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in Brain tumor research and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Evolving Role of the Endoscopic Endonasal Transplanum-Transtuberculum Approach in the Management of Craniopharyngiomas: A Systematic Review of Outcomes, Reconstruction, and Surgical Evolution.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative outcomes of transcranial craniotomy and endoscopic endonasal surgery for craniopharyngioma: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) has been gaining popularity for resection of adult craniopharyngiomas. However, the safety and effectiveness of the procedure in comparison to the traditional transcranial approach (TCA) remains unestablished as previous reviews are outdated.
methodsA literature search without language restriction was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane database, and Web of Science from conception to July 9, 2021. Cohort studies and case series that compared EEA with TCA and assessed postoperative complications, recurrence, and 30-day mortality were included. Articles, where data for adult populations could not be extracted or calculated, were excluded. Article selection and data extraction in a predesigned data extraction form were conducted in duplicate. Pooled participant data were included in a random-effects model.
resultsThe search yielded 227 articles, from which eight cohort studies containing 11,395 patients were included (EEA: 6,614 patients, TCA: 4,781 patients). Six studies were good quality and two were fair quality according to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. There were significantly higher rates of cerebrospinal fluid leak (risk ratio [RR]=0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.32,
conclusionEEA may be associated with reduced postoperative hypopituitarism, hydrocephalus, visual impairment, and 30-day mortality and higher rates of cerebrospinal fluid leak. These findings do not account for differences in tumor size and extension between the EEA and TCA cohorts. Further research on patients with comparable tumor characteristics is required to fully assess 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.