ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for motor function preservation during AVMs resection: Indication or redundancy? Beyond the doctrine of "all-or-nothing".
Article in Neurosurgical review, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The resection of cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) involving eloquent motor regions remains one of the most challenging tasks in neurosurgery due to the risk of irreversible motor deficits. Historically, such lesions have often been managed conservatively or with radiosurgery, particularly when located near primary motor cortex or corticospinal tracts. However, the advent of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) allows for real-time feedback on motor pathway function, potentially enabling safer resections in areas previously considered inoperable. This study investigates the effectiveness of IONM in reducing motor morbidity during AVM surgery. We prospectively enrolled 48 patients who underwent AVM resection between 2018 and 2025 at a single center. All surgeries incorporated a standardized IONM protocol, including continuous somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), motor evoked potentials (MEPs), and dynamic cortical and subcortical mapping. Patients were stratified into high and low motor-risk groups based on AVM topography. Clinical, imaging, and angioarchitectural data were analyzed. Primary outcomes were new postoperative motor deficits; secondary outcomes included modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores and residual nidus presence. Statistical analysis included univariate and multivariate regression. Of the 48 patients (mean age 45.2), 42% presented with hemorrhage and 50% had left-hemisphere AVMs. Spetzler-Martin grades ranged from I to IV. Three patients (6.25%) had residual AVM postoperatively, two of which were intentional due to IONM alerts. None developed new deficits. One residual spontaneously thrombosed during follow-up. Multivariate analysis showed preoperative mRS, not motor eloquence, was the main predictor of outcome in ruptured AVMs. No significant difference in postoperative motor function or mRS was found between high- and low-risk groups. IONM enables safe, function-preserving AVM resection in motor eloquent areas. It supports intraoperative decision-making, reducing morbidity and expanding surgical indications guiding a “maximal safe resection” strategy focused on functional preservation rather than angiographic radicality alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.