Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32034493›Full record

ArticleActa neurochirurgica2020

Validating a new generation filter system for visualizing 5-ALA-induced PpIX fluorescence in malignant glioma surgery: a proof of principle study.

Eric Suero Molina, Louise Stögbauer, Astrid Jeibmann, Nils Warneke, Walter Stummer

Open access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. A Wearable Fluorescence Imaging Device for Intraoperative Identification of Human Brain Tumors.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eric Suero Molina *Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, A1, D-48149, Münster, Germany.
Louise Stögbauer *Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, A1, D-48149, Münster, Germany.
Astrid JeibmannInstitute of Neuropathology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Nils WarnekeDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, A1, D-48149, Münster, Germany.
Walter StummerDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, A1, D-48149, Münster, Germany. walter.stummer@ukmuenster.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3460-0640
University Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe BLUE 400 filter system (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Oberkochen, Germany) has provided visualization of 5-ALA-induced fluorescence-guided surgery for more than 20 years. Nevertheless, constraints, e.g., limited background discrimination during hemostasis, obstruct fluency of surgery. A novel filter with improved background visualization was developed, requiring validation regarding fluorescence discrimination. The aim of this article is to determine diagnostic accuracy and perception of protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) discrimination of a novel filter system with higher background illumination (BLUE 400 AR) compared with the gold standard, BLUE 400.

methodsA surgical microscope equipped with both BLUE 400 and BLUE 400 AR was used. Comparisons were performed on a biological basis and on the visual perception of margins. High-resolution images were compared during and after surgery by senior neurosurgeons. In a predefined biopsy algorithm, four biopsies per patient at tumor margins of PpIX fluorescence and adjacent brain were acquired using BLUE 400 AR only from regions intended for resection and assessed for cell count and density.

resultsThirty-two patients with malignant gliomas were included in this study. BLUE 400 AR markedly enhanced the brightness of the surgical field, allowing superior discrimination of brain anatomy. A total of 128 biopsies from fluorescence margins were collected. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 98.44% (95% CI, 90.06-99.77%) for malignant glioma. Residual median cell density in non-fluorescent tissue was 13% (IQR 13 to 31). Perception of the location of fluorescent margins on HD images was equivalent for both filter combinations.

conclusionsBLUE 400 AR demonstrated superior background compared with conventional BLUE 400 in malignant glioma surgery but comparable fluorescence margins and PPV. Therefore, BLUE 400 AR can be considered safe and effective in supporting malignant glioma surgery.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAminolevulinic AcidBiopsyBrain NeoplasmsCell CountFemaleFluorescenceGliomaHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionMicroscopy, FluorescenceMiddle AgedNeurosurgical ProceduresAminolevulinic AcidPhotosensitizing Agentsprotoporphyrin IXProtoporphyrins5-ALAFluorescence guidanceMalignant glioma

Identifiers

PMID32034493
PMCPMC7066295
OpenAlexW3005338156

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.