SynthesisActa neurochirurgica2026
Spatial neglect in parietal glioma patients: what do we know? a systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta neurochirurgica, 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
backgroundSpatial neglect-a multifaceted neuropsychological (NP) syndrome-has been studied extensively after stroke. Yet its prevalence, trajectory, and anatomical underpinnings in parietal glioma remain poorly defined. We performed a systematic literature review to synthesize current evidence on neglect in this population, highlighting its temporal course, the white-matter networks implicated, and the NP assessment.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, using keywords related to parietal gliomas and visuospatial deficits. Eligible studies included adult patients with parietal gliomas assessed with NP assessment.
resultsOnly nine heterogeneous studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, across 86 parietal glioma cases, neglect was documented in 12% pre-operatively and in 23% post-operatively. Long-term follow-up (reported for just five patients) suggested an 80% recovery rate. Most cases recovered within five days, indicating that neglect may be transient or under-detected. Low-grade gliomas (LGGs) were associated with a lower risk then high-grade gliomas (HGGs), despite the limited sample size. Diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI) and direct electrical stimulation (DES) consistently implicated the second branch of the superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF II), while pointing to a broader fronto-parietal network involved in both onset and recovery. Comprehensive NP batteries proved critical for delineating neglect occurrence and evolution, and co-existing visuospatial or global cognitive deficits.
conclusionsNeglect frequency rises after resection of parietal gliomas, though current evidence is limited by small, heterogeneous samples. While most patients recover within three months, these findings rely on low-quality data often limited to single-task assessments. Multimodal evaluation via DTI, DES, and comprehensive NP batteries is essential for tracking recovery. Larger, prospective studies are needed to clarify the network dynamics that govern neglect emergence and resolution, and to refine evidence-based management strategies.
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.