SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
The dural tail in intracranial meningioma: Heads up or tail down? A systematic review of the literature.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Agreement and Accuracy of the Dural Tail Sign for Differentiating Canine Meningioma From Glioma on MRI.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnostic imaging and emerging image-guided neurointervention in brain tumors: a narrative review.Frontiers in radiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meningiomas are the most common primary intracranial tumours. Recurrence occurs in up to 20%, with even higher percentages in atypical or malignant meningiomas. The non-removal of the dural tail may be a risk factor for recurrence. In this review, we aimed to determine the prevalence of tumour tissue in the radiological dural tail sign. Our secondary outcome was to determine the clinical relevance of the dural tail, if possible. PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies. Articles evaluating dural tails with both radiological and histopathological findings were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies. Data was extracted manually. 18 articles met the inclusion criteria out of 843 identified reports. In total, 406 patients with a radiological and histopathological evaluated dural tail were found. 286 patients (70.9%) had tumour infiltrate; 110 non-neoplastic dural tails showed vascular changes, loose connective tissue proliferation or inflammation. 65 patients with seemingly normal dura mater were reported, of which 26 (40.0%) showed tumour infiltration. It appears that tumour tissue in the radiological dural tail is common. Concerningly, approximately 40% of non-enhancing dura also revealed tumour tissue in the pathological examination. This highlights the need for further systematic research into the dural tail and its clinical impact on recurrence. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
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.