SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
Comparative efficacy of awake and asleep motor mapping in glioma surgery: A meta-analysis of 3011 patients.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Awake surgery versus general anesthesia in the treatment of Diffuse Low-Grade Gliomas - and the role of supplementary intraoperative techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of awake mapping on extent of resection and neurological outcomes of Low-grade gliomas: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Utility and limitations of cortico-cortical evoked potentials in pediatric resective epilepsy surgery: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- Motor mapping to enable resections of peri-rolandic diffuse gliomas.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Intraoperative functional brain mapping for glioma surgery: a comprehensive review of the University of California San Francisco mapping protocol.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Awake Craniotomy Versus General Anesthesia for Resection of High-Grade Gliomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Intraoperative electrocorticography-guided glioma surgery: impact on extent of resection and functional preservation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Passive intraoperative motor fMRI under general anesthesia during open-craniotomy glioma surgery: a prospective technical feasibility study.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Preoperative assessment of tumor eloquence and resectability: an international survey.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Anatomy-Guided Microsurgical Resection of a Dominant Frontal Lobe Tumor Without Intraoperative Adjuncts: A Case Report from a Resource-Limited Context.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standard of care in glioma surgery involves maximal-safe resection. Intraoperative stimulation mapping can improve the extent of resection in eloquent area tumors. Resection is performed during awake craniotomy (AC) or under general anesthesia (GA). Considering the advances in glioma management, an updated meta-analysis is needed. We identified studies evaluating surgical outcomes in adult patients undergoing glioma resection in motor areas, comparing AC and GA mapping until November 2023. Twenty-four observational studies and one randomized controlled trial met our inclusion criteria, adding 3011 patients. The mean extent of resection was 92.2% (95%CI = 89.9%-94.5%) for AC and 92.5% (95%CI = 89.6%-95.3%) for GA. Immediate deficit revealed a nonsignificant risk ratio (RR) of 0.96 favoring AC (95%CI = 0.66-1.41, p = 0.84). Similarly, long-term deficits showed a nonsignificant RR of 1.33 favoring GA (95%CI = 0.91-1.95, p = 0.14). Karnofsky performance score (KPS) analysis revealed a nonsignificant mean difference of 2.32 favoring GA (95%CI = -6.10-10.73, p = 0.59). Intraoperative stimulation-induced seizures analysis yielded a nonsignificant RR of 0.73 (95% CI = 0.27-1.97, p = 0.53) favoring AC. Postoperative seizure analysis showed a significant RR of 0.64 (95% CI = 0.44-0.94, p = 0.02) favoring AC. This meta-analysis suggests that AC and GA are comparable approaches to maximize extent of resection and achieve safe resection in eloquent glioma surgery. These findings can offer guidance to neurosurgeons in the decision-making process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39560794What 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.