ArticleCancers2024
The Impact of Neurophysiological Monitoring during Intradural Spinal Tumor Surgery.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spinal ependymoma: a comprehensive review of molecular classification, management guidelines, and clinical outcomes with a focus on the pediatric population (Part III of ependymomas across compartments).Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Contemporary Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Transesophageal motor-evoked potentials, a novel method induced by transesophageal spinal cord stimulation, are less sensitive to anesthetics than transcranial motor-evoked potentials.Journal of anesthesia · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery for spinal cord tumors poses a significant challenge due to the inherent risk of neurological deterioration. Despite being performed at numerous centers, there is an ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of pre- and intraoperative neurophysiological investigations in detecting and preventing neurological lesions. This study begins by providing a comprehensive review of the neurophysiological techniques commonly employed in this context. Subsequently, we present findings from a cohort of 67 patients who underwent surgery for intradural tumors. These patients underwent preoperative and intraoperative multimodal somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs), with clinical evaluation conducted three months postoperatively. The study aimed to evaluate the neurophysiological, clinical, and radiological factors associated with neurological outcomes. In univariate analysis, preoperative and intraoperative potential alterations, tumor size, and ependymoma-type histology were linked to the risk of worsening neurological condition. In multivariate analysis, only preoperative and intraoperative neurophysiological abnormalities remained significantly associated with such neurological deterioration. Interestingly, transient alterations in intraoperative MEPs and SSEPs did not pose a risk of neurological deterioration. The machine learning model we utilized demonstrated the possibility of predicting clinical outcome, achieving 84% accuracy.
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.