ArticleBrain & spine2024
Assessment of the efficacy and safety of neuroendoscopic procedures for intracranial pathologies: A single-centre retrospective study with 318 intracranial endoscopic procedures.
Article in Brain & spine, 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.
- Use of neuroendoscopy in metastatic brain tumours: A systematic review.Medicine internationalArticle
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
Introduction: Neuroendoscopy has become a well-established procedure for treating various intracranial conditions. Research question: We evaluated the advantages of that technique, with focus on adverse events. Material and methods: Retrospective analysis included all patients who underwent neuroendoscopic procedures between January 2017 and December 2023. We conducted comparative analysis considering factors such as age, gender, follow-up duration, etiology, preoperative symptoms, clinical and radiological benefits, as well as surgical and nonsurgical adverse events rates. Results: Total of 318 neuroendoscopic procedures within 257 surgeries in 225 patients were included, with mean age of 18.8 ± 21.4 years. 170 cases (66.1%) were pediatric versus 87 cases adults (33.9%). Most common aetiologies were peri- and intraventricular cysts (27.2%), idiopathic aqueduct stenosis (24.9%), tumours (23.7%), and post-haemorrhagic hydrocephalus (17.1%). Procedures included endoscopic third ventriculostomy (51.0%), cyst fenestration (21.0%), and endoscopic-assisted ventricular catheter placements (19.5%). Headache was predominant preoperative symptom (42.0%). During follow-up, 84.8% and 82.5% of cases showed clinical and radiological improvement, respectively. Early surgical adverse events were observed in 5.4% of cases, while non-surgical adverse events occurred in 3.1%. There was no significant difference in the surgical adverse events rate between children and adults (4.7% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.563), compared to significant higher non-surgical adverse events in adults (6.9% vs 1.2%, Discussion and conclusion: Neuroendoscopy has demonstrated effectiveness and safety in treating intracranial diseases, boasting a low adverse events rate. Our study found no significant difference in the surgical adverse events rates between pediatric and adult groups.
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.