SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Keyhole retrosigmoid approach for microvascular decompression surgery: systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery is traditionally performed via a retrosigmoid craniotomy. Recently, neurosurgeons have increasingly adopted smaller approaches; however, the available evidence has not yet been systematically compiled. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of ≤ 2-cm-keyhole retrosigmoid MVD. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies involving adults with trigeminal neuralgia (TN), hemifacial spasm (HFS), or glossopharyngeal neuralgia (GPN), who underwent first-time retrosigmoid keyhole MVD (diameter ≤ 2 cm). Primary outcomes were symptom relief and complications. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects single-arm meta-analysis. 32 publications met the inclusion criteria. 93.7% had a retrospective design. The mean MINORS score was 9.9 ± 1.4 out of 16. Among 5,883 patients, 37.7% had TN, 61.6% HFS, and 0.7% GPN. The complete symptom resolution rate was 89.8% (95% CI [0.855-0.930]) for TN, 91.1% (95% CI [0.871-0.940]) for HFS and 88.7% (95% CI [0.746-0.954]) for GPN. The overall complication rate was 13.9% (95% CI, 0.107-0.180), with a permanent neurological deficit rate of 4.7% (95% CI, 0.030-0.074), all involving cranial nerves (CN). In patients with TN, the most frequent permanent neurological deficit was a sensory CN V deficit, occurring in 2.6% (95% CI, 0.013-0.050), followed by a CN VIII deficit in 1.9% (95% CI, 0.011-0.035). Among HFS patients, the most frequent permanent deficits were CN VIII in 5.0% (95% CI, 0.026-0.094) and CN VII in 2.1% (95% CI, 0.008-0.050). None of the studies described cases requiring conversion from a keyhole approach to a standard craniotomy. The keyhole retrosigmoid approach for MVD appears to be safe and effective. Comparative studies are needed to evaluate potential advantages of a keyhole approach over a standard craniotomy.
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.