ReviewSurgical neurology international2014
Endoscopic biopsy of brain tumors: Does the technique matter?
Review in Surgical neurology international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-entry two-stage rotational outside-in technique for simultaneous ventriculostomy and pineal region biopsy using traditional ventricular endoscope: technical note and comparative review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2022Article
- Surgical techniques in the management of supratentorial pediatric brain tumors: 10 years' experience at a tertiary care center in the Middle East.Surgical neurology international · 2021Article
- Neuroendoscopic biopsy: analysis of a series of 80 patients.Neurosurgical review · 2020Article
- The diagnostic quality of needle brain biopsy specimens obtained with different sampling methods - Experimental study.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Intraparenchymal brain lesion biopsy guided by a rigid endoscope and navigation system.Surgical neurology international · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic biopsy of brain tumors is an important part of the armamentarium of management of intra- and periventricular tumors that is generally considered an acceptable and, in some situations, a preferred method for tissue sampling. The diagnostic yield of the procedure has been variably reported. Technical aspects of the procedure should undoubtedly reflect on its success rate and accuracy. Such impact on diagnostic yield of endoscopic brain biopsy is infrequently discussed in the literature.
methodsA search of the medical literature was conducted for publications on endoscopic brain biopsy. These reports were analyzed regarding the various technical aspects.
resultsIn the 43 publications analyzed, lenscopes were exclusively used in 22 reports and a tissue diagnosis was possible in 362 out of 387 endoscopic biopsies with a diagnostic yield of 93.54%. Only fiberscopes were used in 8 reports and a tissue diagnosis was possible in 100 out of 132 endoscopic biopsies with a diagnostic yield of 75.76%. The diagnostic yield in the mixed and unspecified groups was 88.95 and 88.04%, respectively. Very few details on the histopathological methods and tumor molecular genetics could be found.
conclusionEndoscopic biopsy of brain tumors has a higher diagnostic yield when lenscopes are used. Neuronavigation seems to add to the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure. Studies detailing molecular genetic features of biopsied tumors are necessary in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.