ArticleThe journal of international advanced otology2025
The Real-World Impact of Vestibular Schwannoma Fully Automated Volume Measures on the Evaluation of Size Change and Clinical Management Outcomes in a Multidisciplinary Meeting Setting.
Article in The journal of international advanced otology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Vestibular schwannoma (VS) management decisions are made within multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs). The improved accuracy of volumetric compared to linear tumor measurements is well-recognized, but current volumetric evaluation methods are too time-intensive. The aim was to determine if the availability of fully automated volumetric tumor measures during MDM preparation resulted in different radiological outcomes compared to a standard approach with linear dimensions, and whether this impacted the clinical management decisions. Methods: A prospective cohort study evaluated 50 adult patients (mean age 64.6, SD 12.8; 24 male, 26 female) with unilateral sporadic VS. Two simulated MDMs were convened using different methods to measure tumor size during radiology preparation: MDM-mlm used linear tumor dimensions, while MDM-avm was provided with fully automated deep learning-based volume measurements. Interval changes in VS size from the index to final and penultimate to final magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies defined the radiological outcomes. The subsequent clinical MDM outcomes were classified. Wilcoxon signed rank tests compared the radiological classification of VS size change and the management outcomes between the MDM-mlm and the MDM-avm. Results: The 57 interval MRI comparisons in 33 patients showed a significant difference in the classification of VS size change between the MDM-mlm and MDM-avm for all intervals (z=2.49, P=.01). However, there was no significant difference in the resulting management decisions between the 2 MDMs (z=0.30, P= .76). Conclusion: Provision of fully automated VS volume measurements to "real-world" MDM preparation significantly impacted the radiological classification of VS size change but did not influence management decisions.
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.