ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Cadaveric analysis of transcranial versus endoscopic transorbital petrosectomy: comparison of surgical maneuverability and brainstem exposure.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Anatomical insights into the peri-trigeminal zone via transorbital, transclival, and retrosigmoid routes: a comparative cadaveric study with surgical implications.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Endoscopic pre-subtemporal keyhole approach: Anatomical feasibility and clinical applications [SevEN-016].Brain & spine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: While accessing the posterior fossa, the anterior transpetrosal approach (ATPA) and endoscopic transorbital approach (ETOA) use the same bony landmarks during petrous apex drilling. However, owing to their contrasting surgical axes, they are expected to show differences in surgical view, maneuverability, and clinical implications. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of ETOA in accessing the brainstem and to compare the surgical view and maneuverability of each approach. Methods: ATPA and ETOA were performed in four human cadaveric heads (eight sides and four sides in each procedure). The angle of attack (AOA) and surgical depth were measured at the target of interest (root exit zone [REZ] of cranial nerve [CN] V, VI, and VII). When measuring the area of exposure, the brainstem was divided into two areas (anterior and lateral brainstem) based on the longitudinal line crossing the entry zone of the trigeminal root, and the area of each was measured. Results: ATPA showed significantly greater value at the trigeminal REZ in both vertical (31.8 ± 6.7° vs. 14.3 ± 5.3°, p=0.006) and horizontal AOA (48.5 ± 2.9° vs. 15.0 ± 5.2°, p<0.001) than ETOA. The AOA at facial REZ was also greater in ATPA than ETOA (vertical, 27.5 ± 3.9° vs. 8.3 ± 3.3°, p<0.001; horizontal, 33.8 ± 2.2° vs. 11.8 ± 2.9°, p<0.001). ATPA presented significantly shorter surgical depth (CN V, 5.8 ± 0.5 cm vs. 9.0 ± 0.8, p<0.001; CN VII, 6.3 ± 0.5 cm vs. 9.5 ± 1.0, p=0.001) than ETOA. The mean area of brainstem exposure did not differ between the two approaches. However, ATPA showed significantly better exposure of anterior brainstem than ETOA (240.7 ± 9.6 mm Conclusions: ETOA could be a valid surgical option, in selected cases, that provides a direct ventral route to the brainstem. Compared with ATPA, ETOA showed less surgical maneuverability, AOA and longer surgical depth; however, it presented comparable brainstem exposure and better exposure of the lateral brainstem.
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.