ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
Visual outcomes following endoscopic endonasal approach for tuberculum sellae meningiomas a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThis systematic review and meta-analysis assessed visual outcomes following tuberculum sellae meningiomas (TSM) resection using the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA). TSM are frequently managed surgically, with vision restoration or preservation as a primary goal.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL identified studies published before September 2024 that reported postoperative vision status following TSM resection via EEA, with or without comparisons to traditional transcranial approach (TCA). Primary outcomes included rates of improved or stable vision and improved vision alone after EEA. Secondary outcomes compared EEA and TCA visual results. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the source of heterogeneity. Analyses were conducted using R Studio (PROSPERO: [blinded for review]).
resultsThirty-two retrospective studies were included, covering 1174 TSM patients receiving EEA and 1199 receiving TCA. Preoperative visual impairment was reported in 56%-100% of patients. After EEA, the pooled rate of improved or stabilized vision, including both patients with improvement and those whose vision remained stable, was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94). The rate of improved vision alone was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82). Compared to TCA, EEA demonstrated significantly higher odds of achieving visual improvement or stability (OR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.41-3.08) and improved vision alone (OR: 2.28, 95% CI: 1.77-2.93). No significant publication bias was detected.
conclusionEEA appears to be an effective approach for achieving favorable visual outcomes in patients with TSM. While pooled data suggest a potential advantage over TCA, these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the limitations of the available retrospective evidence. Further prospective studies with standardized visual assessments are needed to confirm these findings.
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.