ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Risk analysis of radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma: Systematic review and comparative study of 10-year outcomes.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. 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.
- Tumor Size-Dependent Clinical Outcomes and Complications After Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma.Brain tumor research and treatment · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Determine the benefit of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) compared to no treatment for sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) by calculating epidemiologic risk using 10-year data; apply the analysis to VS that have demonstrated linear growth. Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library are systematically reviewed for VS tumor control 10 years after SRS and compared to a historical cohort of untreated VS (primary risk analysis). Subgroups of VS limited by size and observed growth are compared to the untreated cohort (secondary analysis). Results: Twenty-four studies of 4079 SRS-treated VS exhibited tumor control in 90.93% (87.0%-100%; SD 4.1%), while 1959 untreated VS exhibited control in 65.24%. SRS reduces the absolute risk (ARR) of tumor progression by 25.7% compared to no treatment. The number needed to treat (NNT) is 4 (3.892, 95% CI: 3.619-4.210). Subgroup analyses of (1) VS with definite linear growth before SRS result in a similar ARR of 29.4% and NNT 4 (3.395, 95% CI: 2.966-3.968), and (2) Koos 1 VS result in lower ARR 18.31% and higher NNT 6 (5.209; 95% CI: 4.018-7.401). Conclusions: This "best-available" case-control study of 10-year data reveals that ARR and NNT are similar for VS with and without definite pretreatment linear growth. These comparisons may be applied to CPA diameters less than 2 cm. Results for Koos 1 tumors are different. This analysis quantifies the therapeutic benefit of SRS by comparative risk analysis. The level of evidence on this topic is low.
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.