ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Minimally invasive approaches to intramedullary spinal cord tumors: a systematic review of techniques and outcomes.
Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
purposeTo systematically review the published literature on minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) approaches for intramedullary spinal cord tumor (IMSCT) resection and summarize surgical techniques, perioperative outcomes, neurological results, and complications.
methodsA PRISMA-guided search of PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Trials, and Scopus was performed from inception through November 19, 2025. Studies reporting MISS techniques for IMSCT resection with operative details and perioperative outcomes were included.
resultsOut of a total of 482 studies identified, 11 were included that reported on a total of 222 patients (Age range: 11-72; 52.9% male population). 64% of included studies (n=7 of 11) were retrospective case series whereas 36% (n=4 of 11) were case reports. Posterior tubular retractor-based approaches were most commonly reported, with fewer studies describing non-tubular, muscle- and bone-preserving laminotomy techniques. Tumors most frequently involved the cervical (33.2%; n=74 of the 223 tumors), and thoracic spine segments (30.9%; n=69 of the 223 tumors). Ependymoma (41.3%; n=92 of the 223 tumors), astrocytoma (32.3%; n=72 of the 223 or tumors), and hemangioblastoma (16.6%; n=37 of the 223 or tumors) were the most common histologies. Estimated blood loss was reported in 7 of 11 studies (63.6%) and was uniformly low (under 200 mL); length of hospital stay was reported in 7 of 11 studies (63.6%) and was generally short (3 to 6 days); and extent of resection was reported in all included studies (11/11, 100%), with high rates of gross total resection (87.4%; n=195 of the 223 tumors). Postoperative neurological outcomes were most often stable or improved relative to baseline. Complications and recurrences were uncommon, though follow-up duration was variable.
conclusionMISS approaches for IMSCT resection are feasible in select cases and can be performed using posterior muscle- and bone-sparing techniques, with generally minimal complications and stable or improved postoperative neurological function. Favorable outcomes likely reflect both technical advantages and selection of tumors with anatomical and histological characteristics suited to MISS. Such variables should be controlled for in future comparative studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42303793What 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.