ArticleSurgical neurology international2026
Comparison of the lateral extracavitary and lateral thoracotomy surgical approaches for the treatment of thoracic spinal schwannomas.
Article 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Thoracic spinal schwannomas are benign nervesheath tumors that can cause significant neurological impairment. Surgical resection remains the treatment of choice and gold standard for achieving gross total resection and preventing recurrence. The lateral extracavitary approach (LECA) and lateral thoracotomy (LT) are commonly used techniques; however, the relative advantages of these two approaches remain uncertain, and comparative data in the Mexican population are lacking. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing LECA or LT for thoracic spinal schwannoma at the National Cancer Institute of Mexico (2011-2018). Patients were selected according to tumor location, extension, cardiopulmonary tolerance, and surgeon experience, as detailed in the study methods. Demographic, radiological, and perioperative data were collected. Outcomes included tumor size/volume, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), neurological outcome (American Spinal Injury Association grade), and complications. Statistical significance was set at Results: Forty-three patients were included (LECA Conclusion: In this single-center retrospective cohort, LECA was associated with reduced operative time, blood loss, LOS, and postoperative pain compared with LT. The potential benefits of LECA likely reflect improved exposure and reduced pleural morbidity inherent to the approach, though confounding by tumor size and patient selection cannot be excluded. Given the retrospective design and limited statistical power, findings should be interpreted cautiously and validated in prospective multicenter studies.
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.