ArticleActa neurochirurgica2024
Intraoperative MRI without an intraoperative MRI suite: a workflow for glial tumor surgery.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraoperative MRI (iMRI) has emerged as a useful tool in glioma surgery to safely improve the extent of resection. However, iMRI requires a dedicated operating room (OR) with an integrated MRI scanner solely for this purpose. Due to physical or economical restraints, this may not be feasible in all centers. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using a non-dedicated MRI scanner at the radiology department for iMRI and to describe the workflow with special focus on time expenditure and surgical implications.
methodsIn total, 24 patients undergoing glioma surgery were included. When the resection was deemed completed, the wound was temporarily closed, and the patient, under general anesthesia, was transferred to the radiology department for iMRI, which was performed using a dedicated protocol on 1.5 or 3 T scanners. After performing iMRI the patient was returned to the OR for additional tumor resection or final wound closure. All procedural times, timestamps, and adverse events were recorded.
resultThe median time from the decision to initiate iMRI until reopening of the wound after scanning was 68 (52-104) minutes. Residual tumors were found on iMRI in 13 patients (54%). There were no adverse events during the surgeries, transfers, transportations, or iMRI-examinations. There were no wound-related complications or infections in the postoperative period or at follow-up. There were no readmissions within 30 or 90 days due to any complication.
conclusionPerforming intraoperative MRI using an MRI located outside the OR department was feasible and safe with no adverse events. It did not require more time than previously reported data for dedicated iMRI scanners. This could be a viable alternative in centers without access to a dedicated iMRI suite.
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.