ReviewCureus2026
Impact of Intraoperative MRI on Outcomes in Pituitary Adenoma Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) in the surgical management of pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs) remains debated. While transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) is the gold standard for adenoma resection, the potential benefits of iMRI in improving surgical outcomes have been increasingly recognized. This meta-analysis compares the outcomes of pituitary adenoma (PA) surgeries performed with and without iMRI, focusing on resection rates and complications in 824 patients. A comprehensive database search was conducted until January 6, 2026, to identify studies comparing surgical outcomes in patients with PA who underwent surgery with and without iMRI. The primary outcomes included gross total resection (GTR), the need for additional resection, intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) fistulas, postoperative CSF leaks, meningitis, and the presence of a residual tumor within six months postoperatively. Among the 633 articles screened, four cohort studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 824 patients with PA. Patients who underwent iMRI had a significantly higher final GTR rate than those who did not (relative risk (RR) 1.71; 95% CI 1.07-2.73; P=0.03). Additionally, the residual tumor rate within six months postoperatively was significantly lower in the iMRI group (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.35-0.80; P=0.002). Additional resection rates were comparable, with no statistically significant difference (RR 1.99; 95% CI 0.40-9.97; P=0.40). Intraoperative CSF leak rates showed no significant differences between groups (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.29-3.48; P=1.00). Similarly, postoperative CSF leak rates were comparable (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.29-2.25; P=0.69), and meningitis rates did not differ significantly (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.14-2.71; P=0.53). Patients undergoing iMRI-assisted PA surgery achieve significantly higher rates of GTR and lower residual tumors at six months, without increased risk of CSF leaks, meningitis, or other complications. Further studies should assess cost-effectiveness and refine patient selection to maximize the benefits of iMRI.
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.