MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414050374 · doi:10.22603/ssrr.2025-0204

Clinical Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes of Intramedullary Spinal Cord Ependymomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· article· en· W4414050374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuris Wira Artha, Lukas Widhiyanto, Primadenny Ariesa Airlangga, Aries Rakhmat Hidayat, Komang Agung Irianto

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine Surgery and Related Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntramedullary rodSpinal cordEpendymomaRadiation therapyResectionSpinal Cord NeoplasmAdjuvant radiotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Intramedullary spinal cord tumors (IMSCTs) are rare tumors, with ependymoma being the most common type. Surgical resection is the main treatment, but gross total resection (GTR) carries a risk of morbidity, while subtotal resection (STR) increases the risk of recurrence. The role of adjuvant radiotherapy is debated, and chemotherapy is rarely used except for recurrence. This study aims to investigate and compare the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of intramedullary spinal cord ependymomas (ISCEs) comprehensively. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, analyzing clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of ISCEs. Studies were screened using Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design criteria, quality-assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies Of Interventions, and statistically analyzed with Review Manager 5.4.1 and R software, evaluating treatment efficacy and prognostic factors. Results: GTR improves neurological function, reduces recurrence, and improves survival in IMSCTs, while STR increases the risk of recurrence, which often requires radiotherapy. The meta-analysis indicates that patients who received optimal management strategies had significantly better neurological outcomes (odds ratio: 4.65; 95% confidence interval: 1.77-12.23; p=0.0018). Meta-analysis also showed that based on the management approach, the rate of complication, improvement, recurrence, and overall survival was 16%, 71%, 7%, and 18%, respectively. Conclusions: Surgical strategies, individualized treatment, and advanced monitoring optimize IMSCT outcomes. Future research should standardize protocols, conduct large-scale studies, and refine adjuvant therapies to improve prognosis and quality of life.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.033
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpine Surgery and Related ResearchSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207