Trial reportCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2026
Awake Craniotomy for Eloquent Region Glioblastoma Classified by Tumor Location-A Retrospective and Prospective Cohort Study.
Trial report in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
Strategic Intervention on Preserving Language Function During Awake Craniotomy for Glioma Resection
Strategic Intervention on Preserving Motor Function With Application of Monopolar Stimulator During Awake Glioma Resection Surgery
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe efficacy of awake craniotomy (AC) with intraoperative mapping for glioblastoma (GBM) in eloquent regions remains debated. This study aims to evaluate functional and survival outcomes of GBM patients undergoing AC stratified by tumor locations.
methodsA combined retrospective (2015-2023, n = 114: 43 AC vs. 71 standard craniotomy) and prospective cohort (2023-2025, n = 28: 13 AC vs. 15 standard craniotomy) of GBM patients with motor/language-eloquent tumors was analyzed. Tumors were classified into motor subtypes (I: precentral gyrus; II: premotor/supplementary motor; III: internal capsule posterior limb; IV: other) and language subtypes (I: Broca's/precentral; II: postcentral/supramarginal gyrus; III: Wernicke's; IV: insular; V: other). Outcomes included extent of resection (EOR), postoperative motor/language recovery, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).
resultsThe retrospective cohort demonstrated that AC has advantages in functional preservation across various motor/language subtypes. However, AC was associated with significantly deteriorated survival outcomes specifically in precentral gyrus GBMs. A prospective cohort study, enrolling only precentral gyrus GBMs for validation, yielded results consistent with the retrospective findings: worsened OS and PFS (OS: HR = 3.223, p = 0.0450; PFS: HR = 2.374, p = 0.0476); reduced EOR (AC: 74.3% ± 5.3%; standard craniotomy: 86.9% ± 12.3%, p = 0.0470); and better motor recovery.
conclusionsFunctional preservation and survival outcomes of AC in GBM exhibited subtype-specific correlations with tumor locations. AC with intraoperative mapping effectively preserves neurological function in GBM patients. However, for tumors involving the precentral gyrus, the AC approach carries greater risks than benefits and should be considered with caution.
trial registrationStrategic Intervention on Preserving Motor Function During Awake Craniotomy: NCT05143788. Strategic Intervention on Preserving Language Function During Awake Craniotomy: NCT05143775.
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.