ReviewSurgical neurology international2026
Preoperative embolization in intracranial meningioma surgery: An updated 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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preoperative embolization for glioblastoma surgery: A scoping review.Surgical neurology international · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracranial meningiomas are vascular tumors often causing significant intraoperative blood loss. Preoperative embolization (POE) aims to reduce vascularity and improve outcomes, though its efficacy is debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the impact of POE on operative and postoperative outcomes in intracranial meningioma surgery. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a literature search from 2017 to 2025 identified 13 English-language, non-randomized studies comparing POE to no embolization. Outcomes included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, extent of resection, complications, and tumor recurrence. Due to heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was performed where possible, supplemented by a narrative synthesis. Risk of bias assessment was performed. Results: Meta-analysis revealed that POE significantly reduced complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.88) and increased the likelihood of achieving gross total resection (GTR) (pooled OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.80). In contrast, findings on intraoperative blood loss and operative time were highly inconsistent with extreme heterogeneity. Tumor recurrence data were extremely limited, reported in only on study, precluding synthesis on long-term outcomes. Significant methodological variability was identified. Conclusion: POE consistently improves the likelihood of achieving GTR in intracranial meningiomas. However, its benefits in reducing intraoperative blood loss and operative time remain inconsistent. Neurosurgeons should consider POE when maximal resection is the primary surgical goal, especially for highly vascular tumors. Future research requires robust designs, such as matched-cohort studies or randomized controlled trials, to definitively establish its precise role.
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.