Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40978866›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Intraoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Complications Leading to Remote Intracerebral Hemorrhagic Infarction Following a Glioblastoma Resection: A Case Report and Lessons for Clinical Practice.

Narushi Sugii, Masahide Matsuda, Eiichi Ishikawa

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Narushi SugiiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, JPN.
Masahide MatsudaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, JPN.
Eiichi IshikawaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioblastoma is the most aggressive primary brain tumor, requiring a multidisciplinary strategy with an emphasis on "maximal safe resection" to improve outcomes. Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) enables real-time assessment of tumors and helps preserve eloquent brain areas. While generally safe, rare complications may arise. We report a rare case of remote hemorrhagic infarction after glioblastoma resection using iMRI, possibly linked to mechanical compression from intraoperative gauze. A 50-year-old male patient with progressive aphasia had a maximal diameter of 55 mm contrast-enhancing lesion in the left medial temporal lobe, consistent with glioblastoma. Resection with iMRI was uneventful, and imaging confirmed total removal without ischemia or hemorrhage. Before iMRI, gauze was inserted into the epidural space, and the skin was temporarily closed. Postoperatively, the patient developed new aphasia and right hemiparesis. Emergency imaging 12 hours after surgery showed a hemorrhagic infarction in the ipsilateral precentral and inferior frontal gyri, remote from the surgical site. Retrospective review of iMRI indicated significant brain compression and venous dilation, suggesting impaired venous return during the 30-minute iMRI scan led to infarction from venous congestion or reperfusion injury. To our knowledge, this is the first report implicating iMRI-related brain compression in remote venous infarction, underscoring the need for cautious intraoperative brain handling to prevent such complications.

Indexed as

complicationglioblastomaintraoperative mriremote hemorrhagic infarctionvenous infarction

Identifiers

PMID40978866
PMCPMC12447358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.