ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Predictive factors in spinal meningiomas - a comparative analysis with intracranial meningiomas of a high-volume skull and base center.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microsurgical resection remains the gold standard in the treatment of spinal meningiomas. Available data suggest more favorable clinical outcomes compared to intracranial meningiomas. This study aims to enhance risk stratification and optimize treatment strategies by analyzing clinical and histopathological predictive factors for spinal meningiomas in a large single-center cohort. We present the analysis of 217 spinal meningiomas of our institutional meningioma cohort treated between October 2003 and March 2017. Clinical parameters of the patients such as sex, age, location of the meningioma and extent of resection were recorded besides histological features. Other parameters included follow-up and recurrence. The outcome parameters for spinal meningiomas were evaluated and compared with 1767 intracranial meningiomas. Among 217 spinal meningiomas, 80.37% (n = 172) were completely resected. The majority (96.31%, n = 209) were classified as CNS WHO grade 1. In contrast, the proportion of WHO grade 1 among intracranial meningiomas was 78.21% (n = 1382, p < 0.0001). Patients with spinal meningiomas had a lower recurrence rate with 6.91% (n = 15), versus 23.94% (n = 423) of patients with intracranial meningiomas (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis identified Simpson resection grade (p < 0.0001) and higher WHO grade (p = 0.0156) as independent prognostic factors for risk factors for progression in spinal meningiomas. For intracranial meningiomas, male gender (p = 0.0106) and resection of a recurrent tumor (p < 0.0001) were additionally identified as independent negative prognostic parameters. Spinal meningiomas are associated with a more favorable prognosis compared to their intracranial counterparts. The most significant and modifiable prognostic factor is the achievement of gross total resection. Given the technical complexity of surgery, spinal meningiomas should preferably be treated in high-volume centers with experienced surgeons to achieve this goal while minimizing morbidity and ensuring durable tumor control.
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.