Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42463618›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026

Outcomes of endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery: evidence from a systematic review, meta-analysis, and institutional experience.

Alexandru Guranda, Dirk Lindner, Vincent Wähner, Felix Arlt, Martin Vychopen, Erdem Güresir, Johannes Wach

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alexandru GurandaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany. alexandru.guranda@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-2949-3538
Dirk LindnerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.
Vincent WähnerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.
Felix ArltDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3749-2494
Martin VychopenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1794-0387
Erdem GüresirDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8319-0847
Johannes WachDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4680-0412

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare surgical outcomes between endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery using international comparative evidence and an institutional cohort. A PRISMA-based systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative transsphenoidal pituitary surgery studies was performed. Gross total resection was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, cerebrospinal fluid leak, epistaxis, meningitis, diabetes insipidus, SIADH, and visual outcomes. Fixed- and random-effects models were applied. Fifty-six comparative studies including 26,295 patients from 23 countries were analyzed (13,575 endoscopic, 12,534 microscopic), supplemented by an institutional cohort of 142 patients. Endoscopic surgery was associated with higher gross total resection rates (random-effects RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.15). Operative time did not differ significantly between techniques (random-effects MD + 3.57 min, 95% CI - 17.25 to 24.40). Intraoperative blood loss was higher in endoscopic surgery (MD 44.0 mL, 95% CI 0.94-87.08). Rates of cerebrospinal fluid leak, epistaxis, meningitis, transient and permanent diabetes insipidus, SIADH, and postoperative visual deterioration or improvement were comparable between approaches. Both techniques demonstrate comparable perioperative safety, while endoscopic surgery seems to be associated with higher resection rates overall.

Indexed as

EndoscopyMicrosurgeryNeuroendoscopyNeurosurgical ProceduresPituitary GlandPituitary NeoplasmsHumansPostoperative ComplicationsSphenoid BoneTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic approachGross total resectionMeta-analysisMicroscopic approachTranssphenoidal pituitary surgery

Identifiers

PMID42463618
PMCPMC13375665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.