ArticleNeurosurgical review2023
Perihematomal edema after minimally invasive surgery: a matter of concern to neurosurgeons.
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 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.
- Effect of APOE ε4 Gene on Perihematomal Edema in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Prospective Study.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of formula method for bladder volume evaluation.International urology and nephrology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore the evolution of brain edema after minimally invasive surgery in deep spontaneous cerebral hemorrhage (DSICH) treatment and to analyze the differences in edema after different surgical methods. The clinical data of 105 patients with DSICH treated at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from January 2020 to June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Among them, 54 patients were treated with minimally invasive puncture and drainage surgery (MIPDS group), and 51 were treated with neuroendoscopic surgery (NES group). Continuous computed tomography images of patients in the hospital and 3D Slicer software were used to quantitatively calculate the edematous area to explore the changes in perihematomal edema volume in the two groups after the operation. The peak volume of postoperative edema (37.36±10.51 mL) in the MIPDS group was more extensive than that in the NES group, and its net increase in edema volume was 16.86±10.01 mL more than that in the NES group. The relative edema index (0.86±0.26) was lower in the NES group than in the MIPDS group (P < 0.05). The peak of postoperative edema in the MIPDS group was at 6-8 days after the operation, and that in the NES group was most often at 3-5 days after the operation. There are differences in perihematomal edema of DSICH treated by different minimally invasive methods. Compared with the MIPDS group, the NES group showed earlier peak of cerebral edema and lower degree of cerebral edema. The absolute regression volume of edema in the MIDPs group was greater than that in the NEs group, but there was no difference in the regression rate of edema between the two groups.
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.