ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Quantitative pupillometry as a sensitive tool for detecting tumor-related mass effect in the posterior fossa: a prospective feasibility study comparing metastatic versus skull base lesions.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEarly and precise assessment of tumor-related mass effect is critical for surgical decision-making in patients with posterior fossa tumors, where even subtle elevations in intracranial pressure (ICP) may rapidly precipitate neurological decline. While quantitative pupillometry (QP) has demonstrated robust predictive capability for ICP-related deterioration in traumatic brain injury, its clinical utility for assessing neuro-oncological mass effects remains unexplored. This study aims to determine whether QP can reliably detect subtle neurological dysfunction related to mass effect in posterior fossa tumors, distinguishing specifically between metastatic and benign skull base lesions.
methodsWe prospectively analyzed 58 adults (mean age 55.6 ± 13.8 years, 60.3% female) who underwent microsurgical resection of posterior fossa tumors from January to May 2025. Pupillary function was evaluated pre- and postoperatively using the automated NPi 200
resultsBenign tumors (55.2%) predominated, with skull base tumors significantly more often associated with cranial nerve deficits compared to metastases (p = 0.0023). Baseline pupillometric values appeared generally within normal range (median NPi = 4.4). However, significant postoperative improvements in pupillary parameters, including constriction velocity and NPi, occurred exclusively in skull base tumors. Preoperatively, NPi negatively correlated with tumor volume (ρ=-0.72, p = 0.008), while constriction velocity positively correlated with tumor volume (ρ = 0.73, p = 0.007) and midline shift (ρ = 0.60, p = 0.040). Latency correlated significantly with ventricular enlargement (Evans Index; ρ = 0.58, p = 0.046). Multivariate analysis confirmed tumor volume as an independent predictor of impaired NPi (β=-0.021, p = 0.015). Furthermore, in an exploratory ROC analysis among patients with skull base tumours, a preoperative NPi < 4.0 was associated with meaningful postoperative pupillary recovery (AUC = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64-0.94) in this cohort.
conclusionsQuantitative pupillometry, particularly the NPi and constriction velocities, sensitively identifies early neurological impairment from posterior fossa tumour-related mass effect. Moreover, lower preoperative NPi values were associated with postoperative neurological improvement, suggesting that pupillometry may have potential as a bedside tool to support surgical decision-making; however, these exploratory findings require validation in larger cohorts before firm predictive claims can be made."
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.