Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39687792›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology advances

In situ optical feedback in brain tumor biopsy: A multiparametric analysis.

Elisabeth Klint, Johan Richter, Peter Milos, Martin Hallbeck, Karin Wårdell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Elisabeth KlintDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7987-9841
Johan RichterDepartment of Neurosurgery in Linköping, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Peter MilosDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Martin HallbeckDepartment of Clinical Pathology in Linköping, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Karin WårdellDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0012-7867

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Brain tumor needle biopsy interventions are inflicted with nondiagnostic or biased sampling in up to 25% and hemorrhage, including asymptomatic cases, in up to 60%. To identify diagnostic tissue and sites with increased microcirculation, intraoperative optical techniques have been suggested. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical implications of in situ optical guidance in frameless navigated tumor biopsies. Methods: Real-time feedback on protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) fluorescence, microcirculation, and gray-whiteness was given before tissue sampling (272 positions) in 20 patients along 21 trajectories in total. The primary variables of investigation were fluorescence in relation to neuropathological findings and gadolinium (Gd) enhancement, increased cerebral microcirculation in relation to bleeding incidence, number of trajectories, and impact on operation time. Results: PpIX fluorescence was detected in Glioblastoma IDH-wildtype CNS WHO grade 4 ( Conclusions: The integrated optical guidance system provides real-time feedback in situ, increasing certainty and precision of diagnostic tissue before sampling during frameless brain tumor biopsies.

Indexed as

5-aminolevulinic aciddigital pathologyglioblastomamicrocirculationneuronavigation

Identifiers

PMID39687792
PMCPMC11647519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.