ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Technical approaches for preservation of the temporalis muscle in neurosurgery: a systematic review.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision dissection strategy for myocutaneous flap in frontotemporal cranioplasty based on tissue biophysical properties.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Supraorbital vs. Traditional Pterional Approaches in Unruptured Aneurysm Surgery: Evaluating Risks and Results.Brain sciences · 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
Background: The temporalis muscle is commonly dissected and mobilized during craniotomy. Cosmetic and functional complications may arise from the improper handling of this muscle. Surgery for recurrent pathologies may be challenging due to adhesions and muscle damage. Material and methods: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to consolidate literature on the potential techniques used for preserving the temporalis muscle during neurosurgical interventions. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched using predefined criteria from inception to 2025. A qualitative synthesis was done summarizing the primary cranial pathology, type of surgical approach, the technical clue for temporalis muscle preservation, follow up and complications. Results: We included 27 eligible articles with a total number of 811 patients. About 508 (62.6%) of patients underwent pterional approach, while 150 (18.4%) patients had decompressive craniotomies. Aneurysm clipping was the surgical indication in 172 (21.2%) patients, while decompressive surgery was done for traumatic brain injuries in about 48 (5.9%) patients. Osteoplastic temporalis muscle flap was used in 178 (21.9%) patients, while some authors sutured the temporalis muscle to the cranioplasty plate in 79 (9.7%) patients. Fixation of the temporalis muscle to the bone using sutures through small holes was done in 100 (12.33%) patients. No chewing problems were recorded among all the patients analyzed. Temporalis muscle atrophy was observed in only 13 (1.6%) patients. Conclusion: Proper manipulation of the temporalis muscle during surgery is crucial for the vitality of its fibers and to prevent postoperative functional or cosmetic drawbacks.
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.