Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Comparison of Frame-Based Versus Frameless Intracranial Stereotactic Biopsy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Dural Arteriovenous Fistula of the Vein of Trolard Mimicking a Cavernous Sinus Fistula

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Biopsy and Ablation of H3K27 Glioma Using Skull-Mounted Smartframe Device: Technical Case Report

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Deciding on Appropriate Telemetric Intracranial Pressure Monitoring System

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Laser Ablation of Abnormal Neurological Tissue Using Robotic Neuroblate System (LAANTERN): Procedural Safety and Hospitalization

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Clinical and histopathological predictors of outcome in malignant meningioma

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Adaptive hybrid surgery analysis (AHSA) for adjuvant gamma knife radiosurgery treatment of vestibular schwannoma residuals

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Response to: neurosurgical procedures performed during residency in Europe-preliminary numbers and time trends

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  • Sanjay Dhawan
  • Yuyu He
  • Jiri Bartek
  • Ali A Alattar
  • Clark C Chen
Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: Frame-based stereotaxy has generally been considered the reference standard for brain biopsies. However, frameless stereotaxy might expedite the efficiency of the clinical work flow. Conflicting findings have been reported regarding the relative efficacy and safety of frame-based and frameless needle biopsy of brain lesions. We performed a meta-analysis of the reported data to compare the relative efficacy, safety, and time efficiency of frame-based and frameless stereotactic needle biopsy.

METHODS: The PubMed database was searched for studies comparing frame-based and frameless biopsy. Of the 5248 reports found, 15 were included in the present meta-analysis.

RESULTS: The 15 studies included in the present meta-analysis included 2400 patients. Our analysis found no statistically significant differences between frame-based and frameless biopsy in the diagnostic yield (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.41), morbidity (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.76-1.66), mortality (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.40-2.17), postbiopsy hemorrhage (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.68-1.96), and postbiopsy neurological deficit (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.62-1.65). The results from our integrated analysis indicated that frameless biopsies are associated with a shorter procedural time relative to frame-based biopsy (standard difference in the mean, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.24-1.04; P = 0.002; I2 [Higgins inconsistency index] = 86.66%).

CONCLUSIONS: The results from our meta-analysis suggest no significant differences exist between frame-based and frameless biopsy in diagnostic yield, morbidity, and mortality. Frameless biopsy is associated with shorter procedural times relative to frame-based biopsy. We have also discussed the relative merits of frame-based and frameless biopsies.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftWorld Neurosurgery
Vol/bind127
Sider (fra-til)607-616.e4
ISSN1878-8750
DOI
StatusUdgivet - jul. 2019

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ID: 58984928