ReviewSurgical neurology international2026
Thalamic gliomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 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
Background: Thalamic gliomas are rare tumors with unique anatomical and histopathological characteristics which make them challenging to identify and manage. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to consolidate the evidence for clinical outcomes, tumor grade, laterality, operation type, and complications of thalamic gliomas. Methods: We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses - conformant systematic review and meta-analysis. 327 patients were included in 15 studies. Statistical analysis included heterogeneity testing for tumor grades, laterality, and outcome of operations using pooled proportions. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed using odds ratios (ORs) and random-effects models. Complications and adjuvant treatments were also examined. Results: The statistical analysis showed a significant association between tumor grade and clinical outcome, with clinical improvement occurring in 83% of low-grade versus 46% of high-grade thalamic gliomas (odds ratio = 0.366; Conclusion: Tumor grade remains the strongest prognostic factor in thalamic glioma surgery. While laterality and extent of resection appear less predictive, tailored surgical approaches supported by advanced imaging and intraoperative monitoring can optimize outcomes. Further research incorporating molecular subtypes is warranted to refine surgical strategies and prognosis.
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.