ArticleActa neurochirurgica2024
Anterior selective targeting for radiosurgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: a cohort study.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBefore commonly used targets such as the Retrogasserian Zone (RGZ) and the Root Entry Zone (REZ) were adopted for the radiosurgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN), a more anterior target involving the Gasserian ganglion was used. Thanks to advancements in imaging technology, it is now possible to identify and target separate nerve divisions in Meckel's Cave as desired. Although this approach has been mentioned previously, no clinical study has investigated it until now. This study aims to fill this gap in the literature.
methodsTrigeminal neuralgia patients who received radiosurgical treatment between February 2019 and June 2022 in a single centre were included in the study. Pain relief, medication dependency and side effect profiles of the investigated anterior selective target (AST) were compared to those of the classical targets at 1 week, 1-3-6 months, and 1 year.
resultsA total of 66 patients were included in the study. Effectiveness, safety and application convenience parameters were compared between; the REZ (n = 21), RGZ (n = 20) and AST (n = 25) groups. All groups showed significant improvement in pain with similar results to each other. AST treatments were performed in significantly shorter beam-on-times and with significantly lower brainstem doses.
conclusionsThe investigated AST showed comparable results to the classical targets without any indication of superiority or inferiority in terms of efficacy and safety in this preliminary investigation. As no blocks were needed to protect the brainstem with this method, it can be used for select patients as needed and could even be investigated in larger studies as an alternative approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39604654What 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.