SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Efficacy and safety of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging for low-grade and high-grade gliomas: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Differentiation of high-grade glioma and primary central nervous system lymphoma based on imaging heterogeneity scoring system.Neurosurgical review · 2026Trial
- Advances in the management of pediatric low-grade glioma.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Review
- Review
- Advances in Preoperative and Intraoperative Technologies for Safe Resection of Gliomas in Cognitive Regions.Cancers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (IMRI) has been increasingly used in glioma surgery, but previous studies did not differentiate low-grade (LGG) and high-grade gliomas (HGG). We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of IMRI compared to non-IMRI surgery, without association with fluorophores or multi-modality surgery (IMRI combined with other interventions), following PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes included gross total resection (GTR), extent of resection (EOR), and safety. A total of 22 studies (4 RCTs and 18 observational) were included. IMRI was associated with higher GTR rates in RCTs (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.41-1.83) and observational studies (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39-1.68). Stratified analyses showed superior GTR rates for both LGG (RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.41-2.05) and HGG (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.4-1.66). EOR was higher in observational studies (MD 7.3%, 95% CI 3.96-10.64%), with similar results for both LGG (MD 5.75%, 95% CI 2.66-8.83%) and HGG (MD 6.05%, 95% CI 1.75-10.3%). Regarding safety, IMRI was associated with fewer motor (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.62-1.14; p = 0.27) and language deficits (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.78; p < 0.0001). The incidence of early and late deficits was also lower in the IMRI group for both motor (early: RR 0.97; late: RR 0.57) and language (early: RR 0.51; late: RR 0.63) deficits. IMRI-assisted glioma surgery was associated with higher GTR and EOR, with better safety outcomes. However, the lack of significant differences in RCTs suggests further high-quality trials are needed to confirm the benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40445417What 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.