ReviewJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Resection of craniopharyngiomas: comparison between gross total resection and subtotal resection with adjuvant radiation.
Review in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evolution of surgical management and functional outcomes of craniopharyngiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Endoscopic cyst fenestration followed by mini-orbitozygomatic craniotomy via eyebrow incision: a novel approach for resection of cystic craniopharyngioma. Patient series.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- The predictive value of intraoperative visual evoked potential monitoring for postoperative visual outcomes following extended endoscopic endonasal resection of recurrent craniopharyngiomas.Chinese neurosurgical journal · 2026Article
- Analysis of the efficacy and postoperative complications of thoracoscopic resection through the transthoracic posterior approach of thoracic paravertebral dumbbell-shaped schwannoma.American journal of cancer research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe surgical treatment of craniopharyngiomas (CPs) remains a challenge, with significant variability in the literature.
methodswe therefore analyze current studies to demonstrate how the field has changed over the years.
resultsAchieving a gross total resection for these histologically benign lesions often poses significant difficulty based on their proximity, adherence, or invasion of adjacent critically important neuronal and vascular structures. In our historical literature, gross-total resection from transcranial surgery often carried high morbidity leading some to advocate for subtotal resection paired with postoperative radiotherapy as a preferable strategy. The advent of the extended endonasal endoscopic approach has led to a reconsideration of this tactic.
conclusionsIn this review, we discuss several of the studies that led to the current understanding of surgical options for craniopharyngiomas and discuss how the endonasal approach and more recent published results may modify surgical thinking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40163245What 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.