Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26664949›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2015

Frame-Based Stereotactic Biopsy of Canine Brain Masses: Technique and Clinical Results in 26 Cases.

John Henry Rossmeisl, Rudy T Andriani, Thomas E Cecere, Kevin Lahmers, Tanya LeRoith, Kurt L Zimmerman, Denise Gibo, Waldemar Debinski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Companion animal models of neurological disease.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

John Henry RossmeislVeterinary and Comparative Neuro-Oncology Laboratory, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA ; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Tech-Wake Forest School of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA ; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Brain Tumor Center of Excellence, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University , Winston-Salem, NC , USA.
Rudy T AndrianiVeterinary and Comparative Neuro-Oncology Laboratory, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA ; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Tech-Wake Forest School of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA.
Thomas E CecereDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA.
Kevin LahmersDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA.
Tanya LeRoithDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA.
Kurt L ZimmermanDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech , Blacksburg, VA , USA.
Denise GiboComprehensive Cancer Center, Brain Tumor Center of Excellence, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University , Winston-Salem, NC , USA.
Waldemar DebinskiComprehensive Cancer Center, Brain Tumor Center of Excellence, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University , Winston-Salem, NC , USA.
Virginia–Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine · USVirginia Tech · USWake Forest University · US

Funding

Molecular Combinatorial Therapy of Glioblastoma MultiformeR01CA139099 · NCI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI DEBINSKI, WALDEMAR · 2010 to 2014
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA139099
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This report describes the methodology, diagnostic yield, and adverse events (AE) associated with frame-based stereotactic brain biopsies (FBSB) obtained from 26 dogs with solitary forebrain lesions. Medical records were reviewed from dogs that underwent FBSB using two stereotactic headframes designed for use in small animals and compatible with computed tomographic (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Stereotactic plans were generated from MR and CT images using commercial software, and FBSB performed both with (14/26) and without intraoperative image guidance. Records were reviewed for diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of biopsies producing a specific neuropathological diagnosis, AE associated with FBSB, and risk factors for the development of AE. Postprocedural AE were evaluated in 19/26 dogs that did not proceed to a therapeutic intervention immediately following biopsy. Biopsy targets included intra-axial telencephalic masses (24/26), one intra-axial diencephalic mass, and one extra-axial parasellar mass. The median target volume was 1.99 cm(3). No differences in patient, lesion, or outcome variables were observed between the two headframe systems used or between FBSB performed with or without intraoperative CT guidance. The diagnostic yield of FBSB was 94.6%. Needle placement error was a significant risk factor associated with procurement of non-diagnostic biopsy specimens. Gliomas were diagnosed in 24/26 dogs, and meningioma and granulomatous meningoencephalitis in 1 dog each. AE directly related to FBSB were observed in a total of 7/26 (27%) of dogs. Biopsy-associated clinical morbidity, manifesting as seizures and transient neurological deterioration, occurred in 3/19 (16%) of dogs. The case fatality rate was 5.2% (1/19 dogs), with death attributable to intracranial hemorrhage. FBSB using the described apparatus was relatively safe and effective at providing neuropathological diagnoses in dogs with focal forebrain lesions.

Indexed as

brain tumordoggliomaneurooncologyneurosurgery

Identifiers

PMID26664949
PMCPMC4672202
OpenAlexW1490302253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.