ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2025
Endoscopic supraorbital eyebrow approach versus microscopic subfrontal approach for anterior cranial fossa tumor excision: A comparative study of surgical outcome and quality of life.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare surgical outcomes and quality of life following the endoscopic supraorbital eyebrow approach (ESOA) versus the microscopic subfrontal approach (MSFA) for anterior cranial fossa (ACF) tumor excision. Methodology: This retrospective comparative study analyzed 48 patients (24 per group) who underwent ACF tumor excision at the Department of Neurosurgery, Unit-III, Punjab Institute of Neurosciences between 2022 and 2024. A total of 48 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled based on convenience sampling. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical parameters, complications, and quality of life outcomes were compared between groups using appropriate statistical tests. Results: Both groups had comparable demographics, tumor sizes, and pathology distributions (predominantly meningiomas). ESOA procedures demonstrated significantly shorter operative durations (226±54 vs. 323±72 minutes, p<0.001), reduced blood loss (219.6±72 vs. 459.2±160 mL, p<0.001), and decreased hospital stays (6.6±3.2 vs. 11.6±5.1 days, p<0.001). Gross total resection rates were similar between groups (ESOA: 50.0% (12) vs. MSFA: 45.8% (11), p=0.78). While CSF leak and wound infection rates were lower in the ESOA group, only the difference in supraorbital numbness reached statistical significance (ESOA: 95.8%(23) vs. MSFA: 50.0%(12), p<0.001). Quality of life scores were significantly higher in ESOA patients (ASBQ score: 82.0±10.2 vs. 63.6±12.4, p<0.001), with better performance in social activities, reduced pain, and faster return to routine activities. Tumor recurrence rates were comparable during the 14-month median follow-up period. Conclusion: The endoscopic supraorbital approach enhances surgical efficiency, minimizes invasiveness, shortens hospital stay, and improves quality of life, offering comparable resection outcomes and serving as a viable option with careful patient selection.
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.