ReviewNeurosurgical review2023
Surgical management of symptomatic hemangioma of the geniculate ganglion: fascicular-sparing resection or grafting?
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management and Outcomes of Facial Nerve Hemangiomas: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2025Article
- Cavernous hemangioma originating from the cervical vagus nerve masquerading as a schwannoma: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Geniculate ganglion hemangioma (GGH) is rarely presented in the neurosurgical literature. It extends extradurally on the middle fossa floor and displaces the intratemporal part of the facial nerve. Surgical treatment is advisable at early symptoms. Proposed techniques include fascicular-sparing resection or nerve interruption with grafting. No definitive conclusions exist about the superiority of a certain technique in preserving facial nerve integrity and function. Through the description of a surgically managed symptomatic GGH, we herein discuss literature data about the surgical results of fascicular-sparing resection versus grafting. A PRISMA-based literature search was performed on the PubMed database. Only articles in English and published since 1990 were selected and furtherly filtered based on the best relevance. Statistical comparisons were performed with ANOVA. One hundred sixteen GGHs were collected, 56 were treated by fascicular-sparing resection, and 60 were treated by grafting. The facial function was improved, or unchanged, in 53 patients of the fascicular-sparing group and 30 patients of the grafting one. Sixty-five patients achieved a good (House-Brackmann (HB) grade III) postoperative facial outcome, of which 47 and 18 belonged to the fascicular-sparing and grafting group, respectively. Greater efficacy of the fascicular-sparing technique in the achievement of a better facial outcome was found (p = 0.0014; p = 0.0022). A surgical resection at the earliest symptoms is critical to preserve the facial nerve function in GGHs. Fascicular-sparing resection should be pursued in symptomatic cases with residual facial function (I-III HB). Conversely, grafting has a rationale for higher HB grades (V-VI). Broader studies are required to confirm these findings and turn them into new therapeutic perspectives.
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.