A Semi-Autonomous Stereotactic Brain Biopsy Robot With Enhanced Safety

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1405-1412
Author(s):  
Minxin Ye ◽  
Weibing Li ◽  
Danny Tat Ming Chan ◽  
Philip Wai Yan Chiu ◽  
Zheng Li
2012 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikhail Chernov ◽  
Yoshihiro Muragaki ◽  
Takaomi Taira ◽  
Hiroshi Iseki

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (12) ◽  
pp. 1531-1538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rania GA Elenein ◽  
Leroy R Sharer ◽  
Stuart D Cook ◽  
Andrew R Pachner ◽  
Jennifer Michaels ◽  
...  

Marburg’s variant of multiple sclerosis is a rapidly progressive and malignant form of multiple sclerosis (MS) that usually leads to severe disability or death within weeks to months without remission. Few cases have been described in the literature since the original description by Marburg. The classic pathological findings usually include highly destructive zones of extensive demyelination, necrosis with dense cellular infiltrate, and giant reactive astrocytes. We report a case of a 31-year-old woman with Marburg’s variant of MS who, over a period of eight months, became totally disabled, blind, and quadriplegic, with vocal cord paralysis, requiring a tracheostomy. The patient underwent diagnostic stereotactic brain biopsy. Clinical findings, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), serologic and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings, and neuropathology are discussed. MRI showed extensive white matter involvement in the brain and spinal cord that continuously progressed over time. A diagnostic stereotactic brain biopsy revealed extensive active demyelination with unexpected finding of active vasculitis and fibrinoid necrosis with a vascular inflammatory cell infiltrate, including polymorphonuclear neutrophils and rare eosinophils. Serologic work-up for vasculitis and neuromyelitis optica was unremarkable and the CSF showed only one oligoclonal band (OCB) not present in serum. This is the second case of Marburg’s variant of MS that demonstrated both demyelination and vasculitis. In our case these features were demonstrated simultaneously, even though the demyelination was the predominant pathological finding. Since vasculitis is not a feature of classic MS, these findings pose the question as to whether Marburg’s variant of MS is a true variant or different entity altogether.


2006 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graeme F. Woodworth ◽  
Matthew J. McGirt ◽  
Amer Samdani ◽  
Ira Garonzik ◽  
Alessandro Olivi ◽  
...  

Object The gold standard for stereotactic brain biopsy target localization has been frame-based stereotaxy. Recently, frameless stereotactic techniques have become increasingly utilized. Few authors have evaluated this procedure, analyzed preoperative predictors of diagnostic yield, or explored the differences in diagnostic yield and morbidity rate between the frameless and frame-based techniques. Methods A consecutive series of 110 frameless and 160 frame-based image-guided stereotactic biopsy procedures was reviewed. Associated variables for both techniques were reviewed and compared. All stereotactic biopsy procedures were included in a risk factor analysis of nondiagnostic biopsy sampling. Frameless stereotaxy led to a diagnostic yield of 89%, with a total permanent morbidity rate of 6% and a mortality rate of 1%. Larger lesions were fivefold more likely to yield diagnostic tissues. Deep-seated lesions were 2.7-fold less likely to yield diagnostic tissues compared with cortical lesions. Frameless compared with frame-based stereotactic biopsy procedures showed no significant differences in diagnostic yield or transient or permanent morbidity. For cortical lesions, more than one needle trajectory was required more frequently to obtain diagnostic tissues with frame-based as opposed to frameless stereotaxy, although this factor was not associated with morbidity. Conclusions With regard to diagnostic yield and complication rate, the frameless stereotactic biopsy procedure was found to be comparable to or better than the frame-based method. Smaller and deep-seated lesions together were risk factors for a nondiagnostic tissue yield. Frameless stereotaxy may represent a more efficient means of obtaining biopsy specimens of cortical lesions but is otherwise similar to the frame-based technique.


1998 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abhaya V. Kulkarni ◽  
Abhijit Guha ◽  
Andres Lozano ◽  
Mark Bernstein

Object. Many neurosurgeons routinely obtain computerized tomography (CT) scans to rule out hemorrhage in patients after stereotactic procedures. In the present prospective study, the authors investigated the rate of silent hemorrhage and delayed deterioration after stereotactic biopsy sampling and the role of postbiopsy CT scanning. Methods. A subset of patients (the last 102 of approximately 800 patients) who underwent stereotactic brain biopsies at the Toronto Hospital prospectively underwent routine postoperative CT scanning within hours of the biopsy procedure. Their medical charts and CT scans were then reviewed. A postoperative CT scan was obtained in 102 patients (aged 17–87 years) who underwent stereotactic biopsy between June 1994 and September 1996. Sixty-one patients (59.8%) exhibited hemorrhages, mostly intracerebral (54.9%), on the immediate postoperative scan. Only six of these patients were clinically suspected to have suffered a hemorrhage based on immediate postoperative neurological deficit; in the remaining 55 (53.9%) of 102 patients, the hemorrhage was clinically silent and unsuspected. Among the clinically silent intracerebral hemorrhages, 22 measured less than 5 mm, 20 between 5 and 10 mm, five between 10 and 30 mm, and four between 30 and 40 mm. Of the 55 patients with clinically silent hemorrhages, only three demonstrated a delayed neurological deficit (one case of seizure and two cases of progressive loss of consciousness) and these all occurred within the first 2 postoperative days. Of the neurologically well patients in whom no hemorrhage was demonstrated on initial postoperative CT scan, none experienced delayed deterioration. Conclusions. Clinically silent hemorrhage after stereotactic biopsy is very common. However, the authors did not find that knowledge of its existence ultimately affected individual patient management or outcome. The authors, therefore, suggest that the most important role of postoperative CT scanning is to screen for those neurologically well patients with no hemorrhage. These patients could safely be discharged on the same day they underwent biopsy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. E124-E129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiri Bartek ◽  
Gerald Cooray ◽  
Mominul Islam ◽  
Margret Jensdottir

Abstract BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE Stereotactic brain biopsy (SB) is an important part of the neurosurgical armamentarium, with the possibility of achieving histopathological diagnosis in otherwise inaccessible lesions of the brain. Nevertheless, the procedure is not without the risk of morbidity, which is especially true for lesions in eloquent parts of the brain, where even a minor adverse event can result in significant deficits. Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) is widely used to chart lesions in eloquent areas, successfully guiding maximal safe resection, while its potential role in aiding with the planning of a stereotactic biopsy is so far unexplored. CLINICAL PRESENTATION Magnetic resonance imaging of a 67-yr-old woman presenting with dysphasia revealed a noncontrast enhancing left-sided lesion in the frontal and parietal pars opercularis. Due to the location of the lesion, nTMS was used to chart both primary motor and language cortex, utilizing this information to plan a safe SB trajectory and sampling area according to the initial work-up recommendations from the multidisciplinary neuro-oncology board. The SB was uneventful, with histology revealing a ganglioglioma, WHO I. The patient was discharged the following day, having declined to proceed with tumor resection (awake surgery) due to the non-negligible risk of morbidity. Upon 1- and 3-mo follow-up, she showed no signs of any procedure-related deficits. CONCLUSION nTMS can be implemented to aid with the planning of a stereotactic biopsy procedure in eloquent areas of the brain, and should be considered part of the neurosurgical armamentarium.


1990 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 990
Author(s):  
Paul E. McKeever ◽  
Donald A. Ross

2011 ◽  
pp. 1254-1260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Olivi ◽  
Jon D. Weingart ◽  
Jason Liauw ◽  
Shaan M. Raza

2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. e27.3-e27
Author(s):  
R Ingleton ◽  
B Gorgun ◽  
N Gorgun ◽  
M Hayder ◽  
RR Vindlacheruvu

ObjectivesStereotactic brain biopsy is an established neurosurgical procedure utilised in times of diagnostic or therapeutic uncertainty. Achieving a definitive tissue diagnosis allows tailored surgical, medical or oncological management. We present a 1 year case review of brain biopsies and compare suspected pre-operative diagnosis with final tissue outcome.DesignRetrospective analysis of all brain biopsies performed in 2017 in an adult-only neurosurgical unit.SubjectsAll patients undergoing brain biopsy.MethodsTheatre records were retrospectively analysed to identify patients undergoing brain biopsy in 2017. Further information was obtained using electronic patient records and radiology reports.Results41 patients underwent brain biopsy in 2017. Only 1 proved inconclusive and required repeat procedure. 26 patients had a suspected diagnosis documented pre-operatively based on radiological/clinical evidence. The most commonly suspected pathologies were low grade and high grade gliomas (9 and 15 patients). Of 25 patients with both a pre-operative differential and subsequent conclusive tissue diagnosis, 10 (40%) were ultimately given diagnoses which did not match the suspected pathology. Significantly, 1 biopsy diagnosed cerebral lymphoma.ConclusionsBrain biopsy is a relatively safe and simple neurosurgical procedure which can reliably provide a definitive tissue diagnosis. We have demonstrated how it remains a crucial component in formally establishing diagnosis prior to determining optimum management plans.


1988 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 292-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sydney D. Finkelstein ◽  
David A. Schwartz ◽  
Charles B. Brill ◽  
Robert G. Peyster ◽  
Perry Black

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document