ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
Neurosurgical viewfinder - a simple device for navigation of superficial intracranial lesions: prospective, controlled study.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incorrect position of craniotomy can seriously complicate the course of operation. Frameless navigation stations (FNS) allow accurate craniotomy marking. However, FNS are cumbersome, time consuming, and not accessible to all neurosurgical centers. Our goal is to develop a simple, fast and low-tech method of navigation, and compare its accuracy and working speed with the FNS. The new method includes redrawing the contours of a DICOM image from a computer screen onto a neurosurgical viewfinder (NVF) - a transparent plastic plate; matching the drawn contours with the patient's head, and transferring the lesion contours to the scalp under visual control. NVF was tested on 20 consecutive operations under the control of FNS - first group, and then on another 20 operations without FNS - second group. All 40 patients had convexital or parasagittal lesions extending to the cerebral cortex. The NVF-FNS deviation (mm) and the marking time (minutes) were measured. The craniotomy accuracy was assessed by the centering error (mm) and by the original CRAC (craniotomy accuracy) scale - from 3 to 15 points, the more the better. The NFV-FNS deviation was 2.3 ± 2.2 mm (0 - 7 mm). The mean marking time with the NVF was 4.1 ± 1.1 min, with the FNS - 28.9 ± 5.5 min (p < 0.001). The centering error in the first group was 4.2 ± 5.2 mm (0 - 20 mm); in the second group - 4.1 ± 4.5 mm (0 - 15 mm); the groups did not differ statistically (p = 0.948). The CRAC score also did not differ (p = 0.767) and was not lower than 12 points in both groups. The NVF demonstrated high accuracy, comparable with FNS, and significantly faster marking time. The invention can be widely used in the surgery of convexital and parasagittal lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40220207What 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.