ArticleBrain & spine2026
Bioimpedance in neurosurgery for tumor margin delineation.
Article in Brain & spine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The electrical properties of brain tissue, shaped by cellular composition, fluid content, and ion distribution, create measurable impedance differences that can be exploited intraoperatively [1-7]. Bioimpedance has emerged as a promising adjunct for guiding resection in gliomas and other brain lesions, offering real-time information beyond microscopic views, fluorescence, or MRI imaging. Research question: This review synthesizes current evidence to assess whether bioimpedance can reliably delineate tumor margins in neurosurgery, evaluating differences between normal and pathological tissue and its potential for routine use. Material and methods: We reviewed key studies (2014-2024) on bioimpedance in brain tissue, focusing on in vivo measurements, systematic analyses, and oncology applications, selected from PubMed and Scopus for relevance to intraoperative margin identification. Keywords included bioimpedance, brain tumor margins, glioma surgery, intraoperative monitoring, and neurosurgery. Two recent reviews by Georgiannakis et al. (2024) and Abboud et al. (2022) were included to provide up to date insights. Results: Recent studies confirm tumor tissue shows distinct resistivity compared with surrounding white and gray matter [1-3, 5, 8]. For example, Abboud et al. (2022) reported white matter at 13.3 ± 1.7 Ω m, peritumoral edema at 8.5 ± 1.6 Ω m, low-grade gliomas at 6.4 ± 1.3 Ω m, and high-grade gliomas at 5.0 ± 1.0 Ω m (enhancing) or 3.9 ± 1.1 Ω m (necrotic; p < 0.001). Though absolute values vary, differences between physiological white/gray matter and tumor remain consistently significant. Discussion and conclusion: Methodological heterogeneity and lack of standardization prevent routine clinical application. Standardized protocols and larger-scale validation are needed to facilitate bioimpedance's role in decisions about the radicality of resection.
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.