Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38632184›Full record

ReviewNeurosurgical review2024

Cauda equina neuroendocrine tumor: a report of three cases and review of the literature with focus on differential diagnosis and postoperative management.

L Fabbrocini, F Zin, K Keyvani, F H Ebner

Abstract readReviewCase ReportsLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

L FabbrociniDepartment of Neurosurgery, Alfried Krupp Hospital, Alfried Krupp Str. 21, 45131, Essen, Germany. ludovica.fabbrocini@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-0291-2920
F ZinInstitute of Neuropathology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
K KeyvaniInstitute of Neuropathology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
F H EbnerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Alfried Krupp Hospital, Alfried Krupp Str. 21, 45131, Essen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCauda equina neuroendocrine tumors (CENETs), previously described as cauda equina paragangliomas (PGLs) are rare and well-vascularized benign entities which can be often misdiagnosed with other intradural tumors more common in this anatomical site, such as ependymomas and neurinomas. We describe three cases of CENETs observed at our institution with particular focus on differential diagnosis and postoperative management. Since the lack of guidelines, we performed a literature review to identify factors that can predict recurrence and influence postoperative decision making. CASE REPORT AND LITERATURE REVIEW: We report on three patients, two of them presenting with a clinical history of lower back pain and sciatica. In all cases magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbosacral spine with and without Gd-DTPA revealed an intradural lesion with strong contrast enhancement, first described as atypical ependymoma or schwannoma. A complete tumor resection was achieved in all cases, the histopathological diagnosis classified the tumors as CENETs. In our literature review, a total of 688 articles were screened and 162 patients were included. Patients demographic data, clinical symptoms, resection and recurrence were recorded. DISCUSSION: Differential diagnosis between CENETs and other more common tumors affecting cauda equina region, such as ependymomas or schwannomas (neurinomas), is still very challenging. Due to the lack of specific clinical or radiological characteristics, a correct preoperative diagnosis is almost impossible. With this paper we want to point out that CENETs must be considered in the differential diagnosis, most of all in case of entities with atypical radiological features. According to the literature, tumor recurrence after gross total resection is unlikely, while a long-term follow-up is recommended in case of subtotal resection or local aggressive behavior.

Indexed as

Cauda EquinaCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsEpendymomaNeurilemmomaNeuroendocrine TumorsSpinal NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.