Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40887547›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025

Awake versus asleep craniotomy for eloquent glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Susan I Honeyman, Alexandros Boukas, Melika Akhbari, Blessing Okoli, Richard Stacey, Vasileios Apostolopoulos, Puneet Plaha

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Susan I HoneymanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. susan.honeyman@ouh.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5117-9405
Alexandros BoukasDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Melika AkhbariDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Blessing OkoliDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Richard StaceyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Vasileios ApostolopoulosDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Puneet PlahaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Awake craniotomy (AC) can aid in preserving neurological function through intraoperative mapping of sensorimotor and language functions. It has been associated with increased extent of resection (EOR) and reduced neurological deficits in glioma patients. Most studies focused on low grade tumours and there remains limited evidence assessing utility of AC for glioblastoma (GB). This systematic review evaluates current evidence for safety and efficacy of GB resection under AC versus general anaesthetic (GA) conditions. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of original studies assessing comparative outcomes of supratentorial GB resection via AC versus GA. Studies included patients > 18 years of age, with histopathological diagnosis of Grade 4 GB affecting an eloquent location. Medline, Embase and Pubmed were searched from inception to the 30th of June 2025. The outcomes assessed included: EOR, rates of temporary and permanent post-operative neurological deficits, survival, and functional outcomes. Eleven studies were included, with 1355 patients (402 AC and 953 GA resections). AC achieved greater percentage EOR (MD = 7.55 [CI 2.94-12.15], p = 0.001), and non-significant increase in rates of gross total resection (OR = 1.66 [CI 0.64-4.35], p = 0.30). The risk of developing a post-operative neurological deficit was significantly lower with AC (OR = 0.55 [CI:0.36-0.85], p = 0.008). Overall survival (HR = 7.99 [CI 2.29-13.69], p = 0.007) was significantly increased with AC but there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (HR = 2.03 [CI -1.32-5.37], p = 0.23). AC for eloquently located GB is associated with improved EOR, survival and lower risk of neurological complications. When feasible, AC should be considered for eloquent GB resection.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsCraniotomyGlioblastomaWakefulnessAnesthesia, GeneralHumansNeurosurgical ProceduresTreatment OutcomeAwake surgeryEloquentGeneral anaesthesiaGlioblastoma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.