MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409118747 · doi:10.1007/s11060-025-04990-6

Large vestibular schwannoma treated using a cranial nerve sparing approach with planned subtotal microsurgical resection and stereotactic radiosurgery: meta-analysis and International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) practice guidelines

2025· review· en· W4409118747 on OpenAlexaff
Constantin Tuleasca, Rupesh Kotecha, Arjun Sahgal, Antônio De Salles, Laura Fariselli, Ian Paddick, Jean Régis, Jason P. Sheehan, John H. Suh, Shoji Yomo, Marc Levivier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersUniversité de Lausanne
KeywordsMedicineRadiosurgeryMicrosurgerySchwannomaGuidelineFacial nerveSurgeryMeta-analysisVestibular SchwannomasRadiologyRadiation therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become a standard of care for small- to medium- size vestibular schwannomas (VS), while the majority of patients with large VS still require microsurgical resection due to potential consequences of long tract and cranial nerve compression, intracranial hypertension or hydrocephalus. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature specific to planned subtotal resection for large VSs followed by SRS to the residual tumor to inform clinical practice guideline development. The Medline and Embase databases were used to apply the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach to search for manuscripts reporting outcomes for large VSs treated with this paradigm, with a search end date of June 1st 2023. Crude outcomes were pooled using weighted random effects. RESULTS: 12 series met inclusion criteria reporting on treatment outcomes for 677 patients. Overall tumor control was 89.9% (86.9-92.9%, p < 0.001), with tumor stability observed in 43.9% (19.9-68%, p < 0.001) and tumor reduction in 39.9% (57-74.2%, p = 0.02) post-SRS. Facial nerve functional preservation immediately after microsurgery was 88.0% (82.7-93.3%, p < 0.001), improving to 94.4% (91.4-97.4%, p < 0.001) at last follow-up. Cochlear functional preservation immediately after microsurgery was 58.8% (33.2-84.4%, p < 0.001), decreasing to 57.4% (33-81.8%, p < 0.001) at last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A cranial nerve sparing approach with planned subtotal microsurgical resection and SRS to the residual tumor achieves high rates of tumor control with highly satisfactory outcome of facial and cochlear functional preservation. Clinical practice consensus recommendations on behalf of the International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) are also presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OncologySame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207