Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39627622›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024

Robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Silvio Porto Junior, Davi Amorim Meira, Beatriz Lopes Bernardo da Cunha, Jefferson Heber Marques Fontes, Hugo Nunes Pustilnik, Gabriel Souza Medrado Nunes, Gabriel Araújo Cerqueira, Maria Eduarda Messias Vassoler, Philippe Quadros Monteiro, Matheus Gomes da Silva da Paz and 3 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

13 authors.

Silvio Porto JuniorBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Dom João VI Avenue, 275, Brotas, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. silviojr1212@gmail.com.
Davi Amorim MeiraBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Dom João VI Avenue, 275, Brotas, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Beatriz Lopes Bernardo da CunhaUniversity of Bahia State , Silveira Martins Street, 2555, Cabula, Salvador, 2555, Bahia, Brazil.
Jefferson Heber Marques FontesMetropolitan Union of Education and Culture, Luiz Tarquinio Pontes Avenue, 600, Fazenda Pitangueira, Lauro de Freitas, Bahia, Brazil.
Hugo Nunes PustilnikUniversity of Salvador, Dr. José Peroba Street, 251, Stiep, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Gabriel Souza Medrado NunesFederal University Of Bahia, Augusto Viana Street, s/n - Palácio da Reitoria, Canela, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Gabriel Araújo CerqueiraBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Dom João VI Avenue, 275, Brotas, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Maria Eduarda Messias VassolerFederal University Of Bahia, Augusto Viana Street, s/n - Palácio da Reitoria, Canela, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Philippe Quadros MonteiroBahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Dom João VI Avenue, 275, Brotas, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Matheus Gomes da Silva da PazGeneral Hospital Roberto Santos, Neurosurgery Department, Direta do Saboeiro Street, s/n, Cabula, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Tancredo AlcântaraGeneral Hospital Roberto Santos, Neurosurgery Department, Direta do Saboeiro Street, s/n, Cabula, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Jules Carlos DouradoGeneral Hospital Roberto Santos, Neurosurgery Department, Direta do Saboeiro Street, s/n, Cabula, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Leonardo Miranda de AvellarGeneral Hospital Roberto Santos, Neurosurgery Department, Direta do Saboeiro Street, s/n, Cabula, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIntracranial lesions often require tissue diagnosis through stereotactic biopsies. Originating in the 1970s, this technique has progressed, but limitations and risks persist. Recently, robot-assisted techniques have made strides, providing the potential for safer and more precise procedures. This study assesses the effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted brain biopsies.

methodsFollowing Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for publications up to July 2024. Outcomes assessed included neurological deficits, hemorrhage, mortality, target point error, operative time, and length of stay. Data extraction and bias assessment were conducted using standardized methods, and statistical analysis was performed using R software.

resultsIn this meta-analysis, 27 papers were included, involving 2605 patients. The gender distribution was 1448 males to 1141 females. The mean error in millimeters for the entry point error was 1.04 (95%CI: 0.72-1.37), while the target point error was 1.08 (95%CI: 0.49-1.66). The mean operative time was 52.45 min (95%CI: 37.83-67.07). Diagnostic yield had an estimated rate of 98% (95%CI: 97-98%; I²=31%). The length of hospital stay was 4.64 days (95%CI: 3.13, 6.14), from admission to discharge. The postoperative hemorrhage had an estimated risk of 6% (95%CI: 4-9%; I²=71%), while for transient neurological deficits, it was 4% (95%CI: 2-6%; I²=60%). Finally, the death related to the procedure was found to have an estimated risk of 0% (95%CI: 0-0%; I²=0%).

conclusionOur study found that the diagnostic yield of stereotactic brain biopsy, especially with robotic assistance, has proven to be highly effective. Robot-assisted biopsies also seems to reduce operative times and demonstrate high precision with low entry point error and target point error. Additionally, complication rates appear to be relatively low, and the average hospital stay is favorably short, underscoring the advantages of robotic assistance in stereotactic brain biopsy procedures.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresStereotaxic TechniquesBiopsyBrainBrain NeoplasmsHumansLength of StayBiopsyRobotStereotactic

Identifiers

PMID39627622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.