• Henry Ruiz-Garcia, Erik H Middlebrooks, Daniel M Trifiletti, Kaisorn L Chaichana, Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, and Jason P Sheehan.
• Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
• World Neurosurg. 2022 May 1; 161: 382-395.e3.

ObjectiveModern neurosurgery has established maximal safe resection as a cornerstone in the management of diffuse gliomas. Evaluation of the extent of resection (EOR), and its association with certain outcomes or interventions, heavily depends on an adequate methodology to draw strong conclusions. We aim to identify weaknesses and limitations that may threaten the internal validity and generalizability of studies involving the EOR in patients with glioma and to suggest methodological recommendations that may help mitigate these threats.MethodsA systematic search was performed by querying PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus since inception to April 30, 2021 using PICOS/PRISMA guidelines. Articles were then screened to identify high-impact studies evaluating the EOR in patients diagnosed with diffuse gliomas in accordance with predefined criteria. We identify common weakness and limitations during the evaluation of the EOR in the selected studies and then delineate potential methodological recommendations for future endeavors dealing with the EOR.ResultsWe identified 31 high-impact studies and found several research design issues including inconsistencies regarding EOR terminology, measurement, data collection, analysis, and reporting. Although some of these issues were related to now outdated reporting standards, many were still present in recent publications and deserve attention in contemporary and future research.ConclusionsThere is a current need to focus more attention to the methodological aspects of glioma research. Methodological inconsistencies may introduce weaknesses into the internal validity of the studies and hamper comparative analysis of cohorts from different institutions. We hope our recommendations will eventually help develop stronger methodological designs in future research endeavors.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

10 keywords...

hide…