ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Non-diagnostic stereotactic intracranial biopsies: a 15-year institutional experience.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStereotactic brain biopsies are not without risk, and non-diagnostic biopsies can delay the instigation of appropriate treatment. Institutions rarely report their negative (non-diagnostic) results; this reporting is essential for quality and improvement in neurosurgical departments.
methodsWe report a retrospective single-center decade-long cohort of non-diagnostic stereotactic biopsies. We report the indications for biopsy, histopathological findings, rates of re-biopsy, lesion characteristics and biopsy success metrics such as depth-do-diameter, biopsy accessibility metrics and true (TN) and false (FN) negative rates.
resultsOf 387 biopsies, 23 were non-diagnostic (5.94%). Among 196 robot-assisted procedures, the non-diagnostic rate was 5.05%, compared to 6.88% across 189 non-robot-assisted biopsies (p = 0.52). The anticipated diagnosis was tumor/metastasis in 65% of cases. 26% of patients were asymptomatic prior to biopsy. The target was subcortical in 61% of cases, with median volume 8.36cm3 and lesion depth 65.05 mm. Deeper lesions were larger (r = 0.47, 95%CI:0.02–0.76, p = 0.036). Biopsy showed indeterminate mild gliosis in 60.9%, normal parenchyma in 34.8% and hemorrhage in one case. Two patients underwent re-biopsy. Post-biopsy, 52% were treated medically, 26% remained under observation, the remainder were palliated or underwent surgery. On review of prior and future clinical/radiological/histopathological data, 7 (30.4%) were TN, 14 (60.8%) were FN. No TN biopsies occurred at a lesion depth of less than 50 mm.
conclusionsThe optimal method and equipment for stereotactic biopsies remains an area of personal and institutional preference. Internal review of these metrics can identify areas for improvement of service delivery in a procedure that is central to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with brain lesions.
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.