Table 4.
Summary of results
| Outcome | Results | Grading of results |
|---|---|---|
| Mortality | Information on mortality was available descriptively in one study involving 91 patients. No deaths occurred during the study period of 2 years | (⇔) |
| Facial palsy | OR: 0.06, 95% CI: [0.02, 0.21], p < 0.001, 2 studies | ⇗a |
| Hearing functionb | Three studies showed statistically significant difference in favour of sfSRS compared with MR | ⇗a |
| Vertigo | MD: −5.97, 95% CI: [−11.98, 0.04], p = 0.052, 2 studies | ⇔ |
| Headachesb | Two studies found no statistically significant difference between groups | ⇔ |
| Tinnitus | MD: 9.27, 95% CI: [0.84, 17.71], p = 0.031, 2 studies | ⇔c |
| Balance function | One study found no statistically significant difference between groups | ⇔ |
| Work disability | One study found no statistically significant difference between groups | ⇔ |
| Serious adverse events | No study reported this outcome | – |
| Adverse events (reinterventions) | OR: 2.62, 95% CI: [0.29, 23.57], p = 0.390, 2 studies | (⇔) |
| Length of hospital stayb | Two studies showed statistically significant difference in favour of sfSRS compared with MR | ⇗a |
| Health-related quality of lifeb | Two studies found no statistically significant difference between groups. However, one study showed a statistical significant effect in favour of sfSRS compared with MR (MD: 13.90, 95% CI: [3.02, 24.78], p = 0.013) | ⇔d |
CI confidence interval, MD mean difference, MR microsurgical resection, OR odds ratio, sfSRS single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery
athe studies showed a very large magnitude of an effect that could not be explained by bias alone
bit was not possible to pool the data due to the way they were reported
ca mean difference of about 9 on a scale of 1 to 100 is not of a magnitude that cannot be explained by bias alone (no dramatic effect). There was thus no indication of greater or lesser benefit of sfSRS compared with MR for this outcome
da mean difference of about 14 on a scale of −100 to 100 is not of a magnitude that cannot be explained by bias alone (no dramatic effect). There was thus no indication of greater or lesser benefit of sfSRS compared with MR for this outcome. ⇗, indication of greater benefit of sfSRS compared with MR.⇔, no indication of greater or lesser benefit of sfSRS compared with MR. (⇔), no indication of greater or lesser benefit of sfSRS compared with MR; the 95% CI for the relative effect is so imprecise that neither a halving nor a doubling of the effect can be excluded