Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41952710›Full record

ReviewSurgical neurology international2026

Updated perspective: STAT surgery for significant cauda equina syndromes.

Nancy E Epstein, Marc A Agulnick

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nancy E EpsteinProfessor of Clinical Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, State University of NY at Stony Brook, NY, c/o Dr. Marc Agulnick 1122 Franklin Avenue Suite 106, Garden City, NY 11530, USA and Editor-in-Chief Surgical Neurology International.
Marc A AgulnickAssistant Clinical Professor of Orthopedics, NYU Langone Hospital Long Island, NY, USA, 1122 Franklin Avenue, Suite 106, Garden City, NY 11530, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: For over a decade, STAT surgery has been the standard of care (SOC) for treating significant cauda equina syndromes (CES). Nevertheless, too many spinal surgeons, physician extenders, and other medical professionals still wrongly believe they have up to 24-48 hours to treat CES. Methods: To counter this misconception, we reviewed the evolution of treatment for significant CES from the outdated dominant protocols of < 48 h, to 24 - < 48 h, to < 24 h, to 0-< 24 h, to the present SOC; STAT, "prompt", surgery performed "the sooner the better". Results: A 2014 study found that there is no support in the literature for delaying CES surgery for up to 48 h, and further; "... the earlier the surgical intervention, the more beneficial the effect for compressed nerves." Subsequent studies advocated for < 24 h for early CES, finding they resulted in improved outcomes including bladder function especially for those with incomplete/partial (ICES) vs. total/retention CES (RCES). One study, involving 20,924 CES patients, showed the best improvement for surgery performed within 0 - < 24 h, leading to the present SOC for treating significant CES, as STAT or "the sooner the better". Conclusion: Based on the up-to-date literature, the present SOC for managing significant CES is STAT surgery. Notably, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) "guidelines" (published 4/5/24 on (www. aans.org)) cited the present treatment for CES; "Prompt surgery is the best treatment for patients with CES;" with the Merriam-Webster definition of prompt as "immediate" or "without delay". We agree that the present SOC for treating significant CES is STAT or "prompt" surgery.

Indexed as

Bowel IncontinenceCauda Equina Syndrome (CES)MR Scan-Gold StandardNo Excuses for DelaysParaplegiaPartial/Incomplete (ICES)Retention (Complete) CES (RCES)STAT SurgeryUrinary Retention

Identifiers

PMID41952710
PMCPMC13054340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.