ReviewCureus2026
Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Conventional Craniotomy for Spontaneous Hypertensive Supratentorial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 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
The optimal surgical approach for spontaneous hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remains controversial. Conventional craniotomy has failed to demonstrate consistent benefit, whereas minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has emerged as a promising alternative. Whether outcomes differ according to MIS technique remains unclear. This study aimed to compare functional and mortality outcomes of MIS vs. conventional craniotomy for spontaneous hypertensive ICH and to evaluate technique-specific effects through subgroup and interaction analyses. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to February 2026. Adult patients with spontaneous hypertensive supratentorial ICH undergoing MIS or conventional craniotomy were included. The primary outcome was a favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale ≤2 or ≤3). Secondary outcomes included mortality. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Prespecified subgroup analyses were performed by MIS technique (endoscopic evacuation vs. stereotactic aspiration), and interaction testing was conducted. Three randomized trials encompassing 925 patients (592 in the MIS group and 333 in the craniotomy group) were included. Pooled analysis demonstrated no significant difference in mortality between MIS and craniotomy (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60-1.19; p = 0.33; I² = 0%). However, MIS was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of favorable functional outcome compared with craniotomy (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.23-1.87; p < 0.0001; I² = 0%). Subgroup analysis revealed that endoscopic techniques significantly improved functional outcomes (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.20-1.93; p = 0.0006), while stereotactic aspiration demonstrated a favorable but less pronounced effect. MIS improves functional outcomes compared with conventional craniotomy in spontaneous hypertensive ICH. Endoscopic techniques provide greater functional benefit than stereotactic aspiration, while mortality remains unchanged. These findings support a technique-specific approach to surgical management of ICH.
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.