MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and Safety of Radiosurgery in Cavernous Sinus Meningioma: A Systematic Review and Single Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4415962679 on OpenAlexaff
Lucca B. Palavani, Raphael Camerotte, Marina Vilardo, Bernardo Vieira Nogueira, Lucas Pari Mitre, Paulo F. Ribeiro, Henrique L. Lepine, Leonardo de Barros Oliveira, Filipi Fim Andreão, Fábio Torregrossa, Thiago S. Montenegro, Raphael Bertani, Fábio Ynoe de Moraes, Marcos Vinícius Calfat Maldaun, Cleiton Formentin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgeryCavernous sinusRadiation therapyGamma knifeSinus (botany)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Meningiomas are the most common primary central nervous system tumors, with cavernous sinus meningiomas (CSMs) making up a small fraction (1% of intracranial tumors). CSMs are challenging to treat due to their location and potential invasion. Therapy methods have shifted from aggressive resections to less invasive techniques such as stereotactic radiosurgery, reducing morbidity and improving survival. This study reviews the effectiveness and safety of radiosurgery for CSMs, blending historical and contemporary approaches to guide future treatments. METHODS: A search was performed in MEDlINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases, following Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Eligible studies included randomized or observational studies with ≥4 patients reporting on radiosurgery for CSM. The random-effects model was used to calculate a single proportion analysis with 95% CIs. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio. RESULTS: Twenty seven studies, encompassing 1851 patients, were included in this analysis, with a population median age of 27 years. Outcomes were assessed as follows: the 10-year progression-free survival rate was 87% (323 patients; 95% CI: 73%-100%; I 2 = 89.6%), clinical deterioration occurred in 6% of cases (957 patients; 95% CI: 3%-8%; I 2 = 71.3%), clinical improvement was observed in 35% of patients (1106 patients; 95% CI: 27%-43%; I 2 = 86.6%), major complications rate was 4% (688 patients; 95% CI: 1%-6%; I 2 = 71.8%), and minor complications was 2% (653 patients; 95% CI: 0%-3%; I 2 = 68.6%). CONCLUSION: This study reveals stereotactic radiosurgery as an effective treatment of CSMs, showing high long-term progression-free survival and significant tumor control with few complications.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSystematic review
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 venueNeurosurgery OpenSame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207