ArticleBrain sciences2025
Craniotomy Complexity and Outcomes in Exoscope-Assisted Cranial Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Brain sciences, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe exoscope is an emerging digital visualization technology in neurosurgery that provides high-definition 3D 4k magnified views of the surgical field on external monitors, promoting improved ergonomics and enhanced team involvement. This study presents a single center experience of 26 patients undergoing brain tumor resection using the Olympus Orbeye exoscope with surgical approaches of different complexities and provides a review of the current literature on exoscopic adoption in neurosurgical oncology.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed clinical, surgical, and outcome data from a consecutive series of 26 patients who underwent brain tumor resection with the ORBEYE exoscope. Metrics analyzed included extent of resection, surgical technique, and complications in two different complex scenarios: superficial and deep lesions.
resultsIn our institutional case series, use of the exoscope enabled gross total or subtotal resection in all the patients, with a surgical complication rate comparable to that reported for operative microscopes (14.3-23.1%), which was stated to be non-significant and independently correlated to the use of the exoscope. No device-related adverse events were observed, and postoperative neurological outcomes were in line with the overall survival pathological examination of the lesion treated.
conclusionsIn this cohort, the exoscope enabled the safe and effective resection of superficial and deep lesions with outcomes comparable to those historically reported with operating microscopes. Gross total resection rates were high in the superficial cohort and substantially higher than in the deep cohort, while complication rates did not differ significantly between groups. Future prospective studies with long-term follow-up are needed to assess oncological outcomes and define the optimal role of exoscopic technology in neurosurgical oncology.
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.