SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
Surgical identification of brain tumour margins through impedance monitoring and electrocorticography and the potential for their combined use: A systematic review.
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 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.
- Closing the loop on glioblastoma: A roadmap toward developing bioelectronics for continuous monitoring of tumor state.APL bioengineering · 2026Article
- Bioimpedance in neurosurgery for tumor margin delineation.Brain & spine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextPrimary central nervous system tumours have poor survival outcomes. Surgery, the first-line treatment, presents technical limitations, such as visualising the whole tumour border. Intracranial impedance monitoring and electrocorticography techniques provide insights into the local field potential characteristics, resistance and capacitance properties of brain tissue. We hypothesised that measurements obtained by either modality can distinguish between tumour and healthy brain tissue intraoperatively.
methodsA "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review was conducted, searching PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science. Studies on electrocorticography and impedance monitoring in patients with brain tumours were included. Data on patient demographics, technical details, obtained results and safety were extracted and analysed in Excel.
resultsEighteen studies involving 286 patients in total were identified. Ten impedance studies showed that brain tumour tissue has significantly different values than healthy tissue, while its resistivity varies, being either higher or lower. Eight electrocorticography studies indicated increased high gamma power and altered connectivity in tumour tissue. No studies integrated impedance monitoring and electrocorticography in one device.
conclusionImpedance and electrocorticography measurements have the potential of differentiating between tumour and unaffected issues intra-operatively. Larger studies with standardised protocols are needed to validate these findings. Additionally, the combination of these two modalities has the potential for improved specificity with a single device. Future research should explore the role of these modalities in enhancing tumour margin identification across different tumour subtypes and in improving survival outcomes.
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.