ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Urgent versus scheduled resection in high-grade glioma: patient selection and healthcare utilization in a single-center cohort.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatients with high-grade glioma reach surgery during the initial, index hospitalization (urgent), or through scheduled/outpatient pathways. There is a paucity of literature examining what patients require expedited versus elective surgery. This single-center retrospective study describes complications, utilization, and survival by pathway.
methodsAdults with WHO grade 3-4 gliomas undergoing primary resection (2021-2026) were classified as urgent (admitted without a planned resection date) or scheduled (discharged and readmitted for planned surgery, or managed exclusively as an outpatient). Primary outcomes were 30-day complications and days alive at home within 30 days of admission for resection (DAH-30). Secondary outcomes were progression free and overall survival. Survival was analyzed with propensity-score overlap weighting and Cox regression.
resultsOf 166 patients, 122 underwent urgent resection and 44 scheduled resections; 40 of 44 (91%) proceeded as planned. Urgent patients more often had midline shift (62% vs. 32%), less often seizure (15% vs. 39%), and lower Karnofsky scores (70 vs. 80); all p ≤ 0.002. They had longer index hospitalizations (median 8 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001) and fewer days at home (median 15 vs. 27; adjusted difference - 8.9 days, 95% CI - 12.9 to - 4.8). Complication rates (36% vs. 30%; adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.52-2.62) and overall survival (median 15.4 vs. 19.0 months, p = 0.758) did not differ detectably.
conclusionsScheduled resection identified a distinct population, recognizable at initial evaluation by preserved performance status and the absence of midline shift. These patients spent more days at home and required shorter hospitalizations; no harm signal was observed. These data suggest that a substantial proportion of patients with newly diagnosed presumed high grade gliomas can be managed effectively in an expedited, outpatient basis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42911312What 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.