ReviewAsian journal of neurosurgery2025
Conventional Craniotomy and Neuroendoscopic Surgery for Patients with Hypertensive Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.
Review in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 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.
- Efficacy of robot-assisted stereotactic aspiration in moderate basal ganglia hemorrhage: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Retrospective clinical study of endoscopic transfrontal approach vs. transSylvian-transinsular craniotomy for hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage in basal ganglia: efficacy comparison and value of anatomical cognition of Sylvian fissure.Frontiers in surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage (PSICH) is a devastating disease occurring in 24.6 cases per 100,000 people per year, more common with chronic arterial hypertension. Emergent hematoma evacuation remains a lifesaving intervention especially in younger patients with large hematoma volume and are clinically deteriorating. Timely and appropriate management is key to improving outcomes. In this study, we compared whether conventional craniotomy or neuroendoscopic surgery would lead to improved mortality and better functional outcomes in patients with PSICH. Specifically, we wanted to determine the extent of hematoma clearance, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative time, degree of rebleeding, total complications, and length of hospital stay among the surgical approaches utilized. We searched from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE/PubMed, the U.S. National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, Embase database, Health Research and Development Information Network (HERDIN), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies to be included. Patients with deep hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage of either sex, aged 18 to 60 years, with a Glasgow Coma Score of 6 to 12, with hematoma volume of 30 to 80 mL, and received treatment within 24 hours with either conventional craniotomy or neuroendoscopic surgery were allowed. Outcomes evaluated were mortality and functional outcome. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool for nonrandomized studies. The final search yielded four eligible studies. Both conventional craniotomy and neuroendoscopic surgery did not show any statistically significant difference in postoperative mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48-3.62,
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.