ArticleScientific reports2025
Application of self-made new endoscopic sleeve guided by wire drainage tube in minimally invasive operation of supratentorial deep brain hematoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the clinical effectiveness of a new endoscopic sleeve guided by a custom-made drain and guidewire in minimally invasive surgery for supratentorial deep intracerebral hematoma. This study included 168 individuals diagnosed with supratentorial deep cerebral hemorrhage between January 2019 and January 2023. Patients were divided into two groups based on their treatment plans: those who had hematomas removed using a new endoscopic sleeve guided by a homemade drainage tube with guidewire were included in the Experimental group(n = 84), and those who had hematomas removed using a cranial microscope with a small bone window were included in the control group. Preoperative indices, surgical indices, postoperative complications, discharge outcomes, and prognosis were compared between the two groups. The results found that there were no statistically significant differences between the patients in terms of sex, age, hemorrhage site, preoperative hemorrhage volume (ml), preoperative GCS score, hospital stay, intracranial infection, and epilepsy (P > 0.05). The experimental group was compared with the control group in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative residual hematoma volume, hematoma clearance rate, and postoperative hematoma-related outcomes. There was a significant difference (P < 0.05) in GCS score at discharge, Rankin score at discharge, and GOS score at 3 months after surgery.The new homemade endoscopic sleeve can reduce collateral damage to brain tissue during sleeve placement, reduce postoperative bleeding from the endoscopic working channel and rebleeding in the operative area, increase the hematoma clearance rate, shorten the operative time, and make endoscopic hematoma removal surgery more precise and minimally invasive.
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.