OBJECTIVE In this study, the authors sought to determine which US medical schools have produced the most neurosurgery residents and to evaluate potential associations between recruitment and medical school characteristics. METHODS Demographic and bibliometric characteristics were collected for 1572 residents in US-based and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited neurosurgery programs over the 2014 to 2020 match period using publicly available websites. US medical school characteristics were collected, including class size, presence of a home neurosurgery program, number of clinical neurosurgery faculty, research funding, presence of a neurosurgery interest group, and a top 10 ranking via U.S. News & World Report or Doximity. Correlations and associations were then evaluated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (PCC), independent-samples t-test, and univariable or stepwise multivariable linear regression, as appropriate. RESULTS Vanderbilt University produced the most neurosurgery residents as a percentage of medical graduates at 3.799%. Case Western Reserve University produced the greatest absolute number of neurosurgery residents (n = 40). The following factors were shown to be associated with a higher mean percentage of graduates entering neurosurgery: number of clinical neurosurgery faculty (PCC 0.509, p < 0.001), presence of a neurosurgery interest group (1.022% ± 0.737% vs 0.351% ± 0.327%, p < 0.001) or home neurosurgery program (1.169% ± 0.766% vs 0.428% ± 0.327%, p < 0.001), allopathic compared with osteopathic school (0.976% ± 0.719% vs 0.232% ± 0.272%, p < 0.001), U.S. News top 10 ranking for neurology and neurosurgery (1.923% ± 0.924% vs 0.757% ± 0.607%, p < 0.001), Doximity top 10 residency program ranking (1.715% ± 0.803% vs 0.814% ± 0.688%, p < 0.001), and amount of NIH funding (PCC 0.528, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The results of this study have delineated which medical schools produced the most neurosurgery residents currently in training, and the most important independent factors predicting the percentage of graduates entering neurosurgery and the preresidency h-index.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative embolization has traditionally been regarded as a safe and effective adjunct to microsurgical treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations (bAVM). However, there is currently no high-level evidence to ascertain this presumption. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of microsurgery (MS) vs microsurgery with preoperative embolization (E + MS) in patients with bAVM through systematic review. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, and Embase. The primary outcome was bAVM obliteration. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative bleeding (mL), complications, worsened modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and mortality. The pooled proportions of outcomes were calculated through the logit transformation method. The odds ratio (OR) of categorical data and mean difference of continuous data were estimated through the Mantel-Haenszel and the inverse variance methods, respectively. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies met the eligibility criteria. One thousand eight hundred twenty-eight patients were treated by microsurgery alone, and 1088 were treated by microsurgery with preoperative embolization, respectively. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in AVM obliteration (94.1% vs 95.6%, OR = 1.15 [0.63-2.11], P = .65), mortality (1.7% vs 2%, OR = 0.88 [0.30-2.58], P = .82), procedural complications (18.2% vs 27.2%, OR = 0.47 [0.19-1.17], P = .10), worsened mRS (21.2% vs 18.5%, OR = 1.08 [0.33-3.54], P = .9), and intraoperative blood loss (mean difference = 182.89 [À87.76, 453.55], P = .19). CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in AVM obliteration, mortality, complications, worse mRS, and intraoperative blood loss between MS and E + MS groups. For AVMs where MS alone has acceptable results, it is reasonable to bypass unnecessary preoperative embolization given higher postoperative complication risk.

We evaluated the effect of insulin resistance and free androgen index (FAI) in non-PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome) infertile women following controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. A prospective study was done on 144 infertile non-PCOS women with regular menstrual cycle. At first, insulin resistance (IR), free androgen index (FAI), PCOM (polycystic ovary morphology), AFC (antral follicle count), and AMH (anti-Müllerian hormone) were assessed. The patients underwent assisted reproductive technology (ART), and then preovulatory follicles and oocytes retrieved were recorded. The variables of the study were compared between two groups of patients with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (n=66) and non-OHSS patients (n=78). Of the 9 variables: BMI, HOMA-IR, FAI, AFC, AMH, PCOM, and preovulatory follicles were risk factors, while the age and retrieved oocytes were not. The 7 variables that showed significance in the univariate analyses were determined as independent variables included in the multivariable logistic regression analysis, as a result, a total of 5 risk factors, BMI, HOMA-IR, FAI, PCOM, and preovulatory follicles entered the equation. The maximum contribution was HOMA-IR followed by PCOM, FAI, preovulatory follicles and BMI. Patients with OHSS had higher chance to have ovaries with polycystic morphology (74%), about three times more than patients who did not develop OHSS (29%) (p<0.001). The best cut-points for IR, FAI, AFC, AMH, and preovulatry follicles were 2.36, 3.9, 8, 3.3 ng/ml, and 10, respectively. Patients with a higher value of BMI, FAI, HOMA-IR, and preovulatory follicles and the presence of PCOM are more likely to develop OHSS, which are not confined to PCOS patients.