ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Association between the postoperative glycemic variability and mortality after craniotomy: a retrospective cohort study and development of a mortality prediction model.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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.
- Decompressive Craniectomy for Intracranial Pathologies in the Intensive Care Unit : Effects on Mortality and Clinical Course.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2026Article
- Hemoglobin glycation index correlates with the prognoses of critically ill patients with hyperlipidemia: a retrospective cohort study from the MIMIC-IV database.BMC endocrine disorders · 2026Article
- The Impacts of Diabetes Mellitus on Clinical Outcomes of Hospitalization Following Craniotomy for Brain Tumor.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2026Article
- Association of the single point insulin sensitivity estimator index with functional outcomes and hemorrhagic transformation in patients with acute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Glycemic variability (GV), typically quantified by the coefficient of variation (CV) and the root mean square of successive differences (rMSSD), has been recognized as a potential predictor of poor outcomes in critically ill patients. However, its prognostic value in neurosurgical populations remains unclear. This study investigated the association between postoperative GV and mortality following craniotomy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1,969 adult ICU patients who underwent cranial surgery. GV was measured using both CV and rMSSD calculated from blood glucose values during the ICU stay. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality; the secondary outcome was 90-day mortality. Multivariable Cox regression, restricted cubic splines, threshold effect analysis, and mediation analysis via blood urea nitrogen (BUN) were conducted. A Random Survival Forest (RSF) model was developed using machine learning and interpreted with SHAP values. Results: Higher GV, as reflected by both elevated CV and rMSSD, was independently associated with increased 28-day and 90-day mortality (CV per 10-unit HR: 1.20; rMSSD per 10-unit HR: 1.02; all P < 0.01). BUN partially mediated the association between GV and mortality. GV outperformed traditional clinical scores (SOFA, GCS, CCI) in ROC analysis (CV AUC = 0.72). The RSF model achieved an AUC of 0.841 and identified GV metrics as top predictors. Conclusions: Postoperative glycemic variability, assessed by CV and rMSSD, is an independent and modifiable predictor of short- and mid-term mortality following craniotomy. These findings highlight the clinical importance of GV in postoperative risk stratification and support its integration into neurosurgical critical care.
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.