SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Endoscopic endonasal approach vs microsurgical transcranial approach in intracranial chordoma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chordomas are rare, locally aggressive tumors originating from notochordal remnants, predominantly affecting the skull base. Surgical resection remains central to management, with endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) and microsurgical transcranial approach (MTA) being the primary techniques. While EEA offers minimally invasive benefits, its efficacy compared to MTA remains debated due to limited high-quality evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases up to May 17, 2025. Studies comparing EEA and MTA for intracranial skull base chordomas were included. Outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rate, cranial nerve function worsening, and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) worsening. A random-effects model synthesized data, with heterogeneity assessed using I² statistics. Five studies met inclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in OS between EEA and MTA (HR = 1.39; 95% CI: 0.79-2.45; p = 0.25). EEA showed a trend toward higher CSF leak rates (RR = 4.90; 95% CI: 0.87-27.62; p = 0.07) but significantly reduced cranial nerve function worsening (RR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19-0.83; p = 0.01). KPS worsening rates were similar (RR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.49-1.35; p = 0.42). Heterogeneity ranged from low to moderate across outcomes. Endoscopic endonasal approach and MTA offer comparable survival outcomes in the surgical management of skull base chordomas. EEA is associated with reduced cranial nerve morbidity, albeit with a trend toward increased CSF leaks. Given the limited number of comparative studies and moderate heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted cautiously.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41326884What 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.