# Reporting practices of baseline and surgical variables in spinal cavernous malformation surgery: a systematic review

## TL;DR

This study reviews how consistently baseline and surgical variables are reported in spinal cavernous malformation surgeries, finding significant variability and suggesting the need for standardized reporting.

## Contribution

The study is the first to systematically quantify and map trends in SCM surgery reporting practices over time and by region.

## Key findings

- Most studies reported age, sex, and lesion location, but rarely documented ethnicity, comorbidities, or body mass index.
- Neuromonitoring as an intraoperative adjunct increased from 25% in the 2000s to 75% after 2010.
- The majority of studies originated from Asia, with notable geographic and temporal variations in reporting practices.

## Abstract

To evaluate the consistency and completeness of baseline and surgical variable reporting in studies of spinal cord cavernous malformation (SCM) surgery, and to identify temporal and geographic trends in reporting practices. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42025638978). PubMed and Embase were searched for English-language studies reporting surgical management of SCMs. Eligible studies were required to include ≥ 10 patients (prospective) or ≥ 20 patients (retrospective) and to report at least one baseline variable. Data on demographics, clinical presentation, radiological features, surgical details, and intraoperative adjuncts were extracted in duplicate and analysed descriptively. Twenty-five studies encompassing 1,633 patients met inclusion criteria. Most were single-centre (84%) with a mean sample size of 65.3 (range 20–279). All studies reported age, sex, and lesion location, whereas ethnicity (8%), comorbidities (0%), and body mass index (4%) were rarely documented. Functional grading was reported in 88% of studies, while haemorrhage (64%), lesion size (64%), and MRI sequence details (40%) were inconsistently captured. Neuromonitoring was the most frequently described intraoperative adjunct (68%), increasing from 25% of studies in the 2000s to 75% after 2010. Most publications originated from Asia (52%), followed by the Americas (28%) and Europe (20%). To our knowledge, this is the first review to systematically quantify the completeness of baseline and surgical variable reporting in SCM surgery and to map temporal and geographic patterns in those reporting practices. This review reveals pronounced heterogeneity in the reporting of variables in SCM surgery. The findings support the case for the development of consensus-derived reporting standards to improve data comparability, enable multicentre collaboration, and strengthen the evidence base for surgical management of this rare condition.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10143-026-04144-w.