ArticleBMC surgery2025
Endoscopic endonasal approaches for resection of suprasellar pituitary neuroendocrine tumors: a novel classification based on the optic chiasm and operative nuances.
Article in BMC surgery, 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.
- Clinical Features and Key Prognostic Indicators of Growth Hormone-Secreting Pituitary Adenomas: A Retrospective Study of 344 Cases.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of a Modified Transsellar Approach with Planum Sphenoidale Removal for Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumors with Anterosuperior Extension.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Extended endoscopic transtuberculum approach for purely supradiaphragmatic pediatric craniopharyngiomas: outcomes from a single-center cohort study.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSuprasellar pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs) present surgical challenges due to their strong adherence to vital neurovascular structures, significantly affecting surgical strategies and outcomes. This study proposed a new classification for suprasellar PitNETs based on their relationship with the optic chiasm.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 82 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEAs) for suprasellar PitNETs between January 2018 and December 2021. Suprasellar PitNETs were classified into four types based on the relationship between the tumor and the optic chiasm: type I (prechiasmatic type), type II (infrachiasmatic type), type III (retrochiasmatic type), and type IV (mixed type). We assessed detailed operative techniques and outcomes across different suprasellar PitNETs types.
resultsThe overall gross total resection (GTR) rate for suprasellar PitNETs was 87.8%. GTR rates varied among different types of suprasellar PitNETs, with type IV exhibiting the lowest rate. Approximately 85.5% of patients with preoperative visual disturbances reported improvement after surgery, with type II suprasellar PitNETs showing the highest improvement rate and type IV suprasellar PitNETs showing the lowest. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage occurred in 4 (4.9%) patients and was successfully treated using lumbar drainage or surgical repair. Meningitis was observed in 5 (6.1%) cases, with one fatality occurring in a patient with type I suprasellar PitNET.
conclusionThe classification of suprasellar PitNETs into four types based on their relationship with the optic chiasm enhances our understanding of tumor growth patterns and aids in preoperative assessment. Consequently, determining individualized surgical strategies using EEAs for suprasellar PitNETs can lead to higher resection rates and better visual outcomes.
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.