ArticleNeurosurgery practice2026
Optimized Endoscopic Hemostasis in Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Pilot Study of the "Chopsticks" Technique.
Article in Neurosurgery practice, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEndoscopic evacuation for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage can limit approach-related injury, but hemostasis and visualization within a narrow corridor remain challenging. We evaluated whether a single-surgeon "chopsticks" configuration was associated with improved operative efficiency and early neurological recovery compared with a conventional 2-surgeon, 3-handed technique.
methodsWe performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of supratentorial spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage treated with endoport-assisted endoscopic evacuation (control, n = 25; chopsticks, n = 20) after excluding structured training-phase cases. Primary outcomes were operative time and estimated blood loss. Early neurological recovery (secondary outcome) was assessed using the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score on postoperative day 3 (D3) and day 7 (D7); ΔFOUR was defined as FOUR_D7 - FOUR_D3. Other outcomes were exploratory.
resultsBaseline characteristics were similar between groups. Operative time was shorter with the chopsticks configuration (118.3 ± 14.8 vs 147.3 ± 52.9 minutes;
conclusionIn this pilot cohort, the chopsticks configuration was associated with improved operative efficiency and a steeper early neurological recovery trajectory without differences in gross evacuation extent. Prospective validation is warranted.
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.