ArticlePituitary2026
Endoscopic endonasal infrachiasmatic approach to intra-third ventricle craniopharyngiomas: surgical outcomes and limits to complete resection.
Article in Pituitary, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the surgical outcomes of the endoscopic endonasal infrachiasmatic approach (EEIA) for intra-third ventricle craniopharyngiomas (IVC) and to define the anatomical limits of tumor resection through this corridor.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 21 cases of IVCs (17 primary and 4 recurrent) who underwent EEIA between 2016 and 2025. Clinical data were obtained from the institution's database. Surgical outcomes and anatomical limits of tumor resection were examined.
resultsGross total resection (GTR) was achieved in 18 cases and subtotal resection (STR) in 3 cases. Among patients with preoperative visual and cognitive impairment, improvements were noted in 69.2% and 88.9%, respectively. Tumor margins extending beyond the anterior suprachiasmatic limit of visualization of the infrachiasmatic corridor (IC), corresponding to the chiasma-clival line (CCL), limited safe dissection. Furthermore, tumor adherence to adjacent vasculature and mammillary bodies represented an additional limitation.
conclusionThe EEIA may enable aggressive resection of IVCs while preserving and improving visual and cognitive function. Complete resection is limited by the geometry of the operative corridor and tumor adherence to vital structures. The CCL may serve as a practical marker of the anterior suprachiasmatic limit of the corridor and aid in preoperative planning, particularly in identifying cases that may require alternative or staged approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42426537What 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.