ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
In-situ bone flap combined with a nasoseptal flap or a free mucosa flap for skull base reconstruction after endoscopic resection of craniopharyngiomas: A series of 115 cases.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous reports have indicated that in comparison with the use of a nasal septal flap (NSF) for skull base reconstruction, the use of a free mucosal flap (FMF) is associated with an increased incidence of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage in patients with intraoperative high-flow CSF leakage but less nasal trauma. The authors previously reported that the use of an in situ bone flap (ISBF) was beneficial for controlling postoperative CSF leakage. The objective of this study was twofold. The first aim was to analyze the risk factors associated with postoperative CSF leakage. Second, the CSF leakage rate was compared between the two reconstruction techniques for different risk factors and total Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-20 (SNOT-20) scores. The results verify the feasibility of the use of an ISBF combined with an FMF for skull base reconstruction to control postoperative CSF leakage. Furthermore, the findings clarify the choice of skull base reconstruction in different situations. A retrospective review of 115 patients with craniopharyngiomas treated between May 2018 and June 2022 was conducted. Reconstruction of the skull base was performed in 67 patients using a combination of ISBF and NSF by October 2020 and in 48 patients using a combination of ISBF and FMF after October 2020. The overall rate of postoperative CSF leakage was 8.7%. According to the univariate analysis, a BMI ≥ 25 (20.7% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.016) and predominantly solid tumors (15.1% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.042) were associated with higher rates of postoperative CSF leakage. In the multivariate analysis, a BMI ≥ 25 and a solid component > 50% were identified as independent risk factors for postoperative CSF leakage. The mean SNOT-20 score was lower in the ISBF + FMF group than in the ISBF + NSF group at six months after surgery (13 ± 12.7 vs. 16 ± 16, p = 0.037). With respect to the repair of skull base defects by using the ISBF, the application of FMF controlled the postoperative CSF leakage rate within an acceptable range. Furthermore, it offered advantages over NSF in terms of SNOT-20 scores at six months post-operatively. A BMI ≥ 25 and a solid component > 50% were independent risk factors for postoperative CSF leakage. NSF remains a more suitable option for patients with a BMI ≥ 25.
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.