SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Surgical treatment of recurrent glioblastoma: a multicenter perspective from the Italian society of neurosurgery (SINch
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2026. 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
36 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given the lack of effective second-line oncotherapy, the role of reoperation and the optimal treatment strategy for recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) remains controversial. For this reason, we conducted a multicenter retrospective study joined with a systematic literature review to investigate the role of reoperation in patients with rGBM, to identify key factors for the selection of patients that can benefit from reoperation. A retrospective analysis of 236 surgically treated patients with rGBM from 14 different neurosurgical centers between 2012 and 2019 was performed. In addition, a systematic review of the literature was conducted with 87 papers (72 retrospective and 15 prospective) included in the final analysis. In our multicenter cohort, variables significantly relating with a longer post-recurrence survival (PRS) were Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) at recurrence (p = 0.001), tumor volume at recurrence (p = 0.011), absence of ependymal involvement at recurrence (p = 0.022), MGMT methylation both at first (p = 0.024) and second surgery (p = 0.030), supramaximal contrast-enhancing (CE) resection (RANO Class 1) both at first (p = 0.010) and second surgery (p = 0.002). After a review of the literature, reoperation and a higher preoperative KPS at recurrence were considered statistically significant variables for improved OS in 46/68 studies (68%) and 47/60 studies (78%), respectively. Maximal CE resection at first and second surgery was associated with a longer OS in 37/51 (73%) and 23/34 (68%) studies, respectively. RANO Class 1 resection and a Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 70 at recurrence appear to be key prdictors to improved post-recurrence survival and preserving quality of life in rGBM patients. Additional factors, including tumor volume at recurrence, ependymal involvement, and MGMT promoter methylation status, should be carefully integrated into the multidisciplinary assessment of suitability for reopration in rGBM patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41591525What 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.