ArticleChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2024
The telovelar approach for fourth ventricular tumors in children: is removal of the posterior arch of C1 necessary?
Article in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perspectives on patient positioning for surgery of fourth ventricular tumors and commentary on "The telovelar approach for fourth ventricular tumors in children: is removal of the posterior arch of C1 necessary?" by Cho and Dorfer et al.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVarious surgical nuances of the telovelar approach have been suggested. The necessity of removing the posterior arch of C1 to accomplish optimal tumor exposure is still debated. Therefore, we report on our experience and technical details of the fourth ventricular tumor resection in a modified prone position without systematic removal of the posterior arch of C1.
methodsA retrospective analysis of all pediatric patients, who underwent a fourth ventricular tumor resection in the modified prone position between 2012 and 2021, was performed.
resultsWe identified 40 patients with a median age of 6 years and a M:F ratio of 25:15. A telovelar approach was performed in all cases. In 39/40 patients, the posterior arch of C1 was not removed. In the remaining patient, the reason for removing C1 was tumor extension below the level of C2 with ventral extension. Gross or near total resection could be achieved in 34/39 patients, and subtotal resection in 5/39 patients. In none of the patients, a limited exposure, sight of view, or range of motion caused by the posterior arch of C1 was encountered, necessitating an unplanned removal of the posterior arch of C1. Importantly, in none of the cases, the surgeon had the impression of a limited sight of view to the most rostral parts of the fourth ventricle, which necessitated a vermian incision.
conclusionA telovelar approach without the removal of the posterior arch of C1 allows for an optimal exposure of the fourth ventricle provided that critical nuances in patient positioning are considered.
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.