ArticleNeurosurgical review2024
Efficacy, safety, and impact of fluorescein in frameless stereotactic needle biopsies - a case series.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "Efficacy, safety, and impact of fluorescein in frameless stereotactic needle biopsies - a case series".Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Comment on, "Efficacy, safety, and impact of fluorescein in frameless stereotactic needle biopsies - a case series".Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stereotactic needle biopsy stands as a crucial method for diagnosing intracranial lesions unsuitable for surgical intervention. Nonetheless, the potential for sampling errors lead to innovative approaches to enhance diagnostic precision. This study contrasts the outcomes of patients undergoing fluorescein-assisted frameless stereotactic needle biopsy with those receiving traditional biopsies to evaluate the impact on diagnostic accuracy and safety. This study included patients with contrast-enhancing intracranial lesions, comprising a prospective group undergoing fluorescein-assisted biopsies and a retrospective group undergoing conventional biopsies at the same institution. We've collected data on demographics, procedural specifics, diagnostic outcomes, and postoperative events. A comparative analysis involved 43 patients who received fluorescein-assisted biopsies against 77 patients who underwent conventional biopsies. The average age was 60.5 years. The fluorescein group exhibited a 93% success rate in diagnosis, markedly higher than the 70.1% in the non-fluorescein group (OR = 5.67; 95%IC: 1.59-20.24; p < 0.01). The rate of complications was statistically similar across both cohorts. Despite its established value, stereotactic needle biopsy is susceptible to inaccuracies and complications. The application of fluorescence-based adjuncts like 5-ALA and fluorescein has been investigated to improve diagnostic fidelity and reduce risks. These technologies potentially minimize the necessity for multiple biopsies, decrease surgical duration, and provide immediate verification of tumor presence. Fluorescein-assisted stereotactic biopsy emerges as an effective, secure alternative to conventional methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39223420What 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.