ArticleSpinal cord2025
Surgical and clinical outcomes of ventral versus dorsal/lateral intradural extramedullary schwannomas: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in Spinal cord, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Minimally invasive extracavitary approach for selected ventral intradural extramedullary thoracic lesions: quantitative anatomical analysis and technical feasibility.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective comparative study.
objectivesTo compare the surgical and clinical outcomes of ventral intradural extramedullary (IDEM) schwannomas to those of dorsal/lateral IDEM schwannomas.
settingThe single institution in Japan.
methodsThis study included 94 patients with cervical or thoracic IDEM schwannomas who underwent tumor resection via a posterior approach between 2012 and 2022. Patients were categorized into Ventral (n = 12) and Dorsal/Lateral (n = 82) groups based on tumor localization. Demographic and surgical data, including surgical time and intraoperative motor evoked potential (MEP) changes, as well as clinical outcomes such as Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and gait function (modified McCormick scale, MMCS), were evaluated.
resultsThe Ventral group had a significantly longer surgical time (p = 0.039) and was more likely to experience a temporary decrease in intraoperative MEP waveforms (p = 0.008) compared to the Dorsal/Lateral group. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in age at surgery, sex, level, tumor size, estimated blood loss, JOA score improvement, JOA recovery rate, or gait function at the final follow-up. Gross total resection (GTR) was achieved in all cases.
conclusionsDespite longer surgical times and more likely to experience a temporary decrease in intraoperative MEP waveforms, ventral IDEM schwannomas do not result in significantly worse surgical or clinical outcomes compared to dorsal/lateral IDEM schwannomas. These findings suggest that even if the surgical procedure requires longer, gross total resection of ventral schwannomas via a posterior approach is resulting in favorable treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40628951What 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.