ReviewCureus2026
Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery in the Treatment of Pituitary Adenoma: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Pituitary Society Delphi consensus on the role of radiotherapy for pituitary adenomas.Pituitary · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pituitary adenomas are the most prevalent pituitary pathology and originate from the neoplastic proliferation of anterior pituitary lobe cell lineages. Two primary surgical approaches are employed: microscopic transsphenoidal surgery (MTS) and endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS). Both approaches aim to optimize tumor resection while reducing the risk of complications. The objective of this review is to compare the outcomes of ETS and MTS in the treatment of pituitary adenomas. Studies from 1974 to March 20, 2026, from PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane databases were included. The inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with pituitary adenomas and patients aged ≥18 years. The systematic review includes a total of 22 articles with a total of 4390 participants, of which 2413 underwent ETS and 1973 underwent MTS. The findings suggest that gross total resection (GTR) was more frequently reported in patients undergoing the endoscopic technique; however, considerable variability exists across studies. Postoperative complication rates were variable and showed substantial overlap between endoscopic and microscopic techniques. Although the endoscopic technique may provide some benefits, overall safety and recovery outcomes seem to be affected more by study features and the surgeon's experience than by the surgical method itself. The comparison between both surgical techniques suggests potential advantages for the endoscopic approach in terms of GTR; however, clinical outcomes, including complications, recovery, and endocrine function, are comparable between techniques and appear to be influenced more by surgical expertise, tumor characteristics, and study design than by the surgical approach alone.
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.