ArticleNeurosurgical review2023
A retrospective study to examine the association of different pear-shaped balloons with efficacy and postoperative complications in percutaneous balloon compression for trigeminal neuralgia.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2023. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between intraoperative balloon morphology and postoperative sensory dysfunction after percutaneous balloon compression for trigeminal neuralgia: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Analysis of Risk Prediction Model for Recurrence of Trigeminal Neuralgia After Percutaneous Balloon Compression.Pain research & management · 2026Article
- A nomogram based on radiomics and clinical information to predict prognosis in percutaneous balloon compression for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Machine learning to predict radiomics models of classical trigeminal neuralgia response to percutaneous balloon compression treatment.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Percutaneous balloon compression is a safe and effective therapeutic modality for trigeminal neuralgia. It is widely recognized that the pear-shaped balloon is the key to the success of the procedure. This study aimed to analyze the effect of different pear-shaped balloons on the duration of the treatment outcome. In addition, the relationship between individual variables and the duration and severity of complications was analyzed. The clinical data and intraoperative radiographs of 132 patients with trigeminal neuralgia were reviewed. We classify pear-shaped balloons into type A, type B, and type C balloons depending on the size of their heads. The collected variables were correlated with prognosis by univariate and multivariate analyses. The efficiency of the procedure was 96.9%. There was no significant difference in pain relief rates between the different pear-shaped balloons. Median pain-free survival time was longer for type B and C balloons, which were significantly different from type A balloons. In addition, pain duration also was a risk factor for recurrence. There was no significant difference in the duration of numbness between the different types of pear-shaped balloons, but type C balloons resulted in longer-lasting masticatory muscle weakness. Duration of compression and balloon shape can also significantly influence the severity of complications. Different pear-shaped balloons have been shown to have a significant effect on the efficacy and complications of the PBC procedure, with type B balloons (head ratio: 10-20%) appearing to be the ideal pear shape. However, its clinical application remains to be validated.
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.