Top

Child's Nervous System

Published in:

Open Access 01-07-2018 | Review Paper

Robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: systematic review and bibliometric analysis

Authors: Hani J. Marcus, Vejay N. Vakharia, Sebastien Ourselin, John Duncan, Martin Tisdall, Kristian Aquilina

Published in: Child's Nervous System | Issue 7/2018

Abstract

Introduction

Stereotactic brain biopsy represents one of the earliest applications of surgical robotics. The aim of the present systematic review and bibliometric analysis was to evaluate the literature supporting robot-assisted brain biopsy and the extent to which the scientific community has accepted the technique.

Methods

The Cochrane and PubMed databases were searched over a 30-year period between 1st of January 1988 and 31st of December 2017. Titles and abstracts were screened to identify publications that met the following criteria: (1) featured patients with brain pathology, (2) undergoing stereotactic brain biopsy, (3) reporting robot-assisted surgery, and (4) outcome data were provided. The reference lists of selected studies were also sought, and expert opinion sought to identify further eligible publications. Selected manuscripts were then reviewed, and data extracted on effectiveness and safety. The status of scientific community acceptance was determined using a progressive scholarly acceptance analysis.

Results

All identified studies were non-randomised, including 1 retrospective cohort study and 14 case series or reports. The diagnostic biopsy rate varied from 75 to 100%, and the average target accuracy varied from 0.9 to 4.5 mm. Use of the robot was aborted in two operations owing to geometric inaccessibility and an error in image registration but no associated adverse events were reported. A compounding progressive scholarly acceptance analysis suggested a trend towards acceptance of the technique by the scientific community.

Conclusions

In conclusion, robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy is an increasingly mainstream tool in the neurosurgical armamentarium. Further evaluation should proceed along the IDEAL framework with research databases and comparative trials.

Hughes-Hallett A, Mayer EK, Marcus HJ, Cundy TP, Pratt PJ, Parston G, Vale JA, Darzi AW (2014) Quantifying innovation in surgery. Ann Surg 260:205–211. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000662 CrossRefPubMed

Kwoh YS, Hou J, Jonckheere EA, Hayati S (1988) A robot with improved absolute positioning accuracy for CT guided stereotactic brain surgery. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 35:153–160. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.1354 CrossRefPubMed

Cook JA, McCulloch P, Blazeby JM, Beard DJ, Marinac-Dabic D, Sedrakyan A (2013) IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 3: randomised controlled trials in the assessment stage and evaluations in the long term study stage. BMJ 346:f2820CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ergina PL, Barkun JS, McCulloch P, Cook JA, Altman DG (2013) IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 2: observational studies in the exploration and assessment stages. BMJ 346:f3011CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

McCulloch P, Cook JA, Altman DG, Heneghan CDM (2013) IDEAL group. IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 1: the idea and development stages. BMJ 346:f3012CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62:e1–e34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 CrossRefPubMed

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, Dm HJM, Regional O, Relief P (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? 12:1–12

Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73:712–716. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02748.x CrossRefPubMed

Schnurman Z, Kondziolka D (2016) Evaluating innovation. Part 1: the concept of progressive scholarly acceptance. J Neurosurg 124:207–211. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.1.JNS142661 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Schnurman Z, Kondziolka D (2016) Evaluating innovation. Part 2: development in neurosurgery. J Neurosurg 124:212–223. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.1.JNS142664 CrossRefPubMed

11.

OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. “The Oxford Levels of Evidence 2”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine

12.

Dellaretti M, Reyns N, Touzet G, Dubois F, Gusmao S, Pereira JLB, Blond S (2012) Diffuse brainstem glioma: prognostic factors. J Neurosurg 117:810–814. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.7.JNS111992 CrossRefPubMed

13.

De Benedictis A, Trezza A, Carai A, Genovese E, Procaccini E, Messina R, Randi F, Cossu S, Esposito G, Palma P, Amante P, Rizzi M, Marras CE (2017) Robot-assisted procedures in pediatric neurosurgery. Neurosurg Focus 42:E7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.2.FOCUS16579 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Carai A, Mastronuzzi A, De Benedictis A, Messina R, Cacchione A, Miele E, Randi F, Esposito G, Trezza A, Colafati GS, Savioli A, Locatelli F, Marras CE (2017) Robot-assisted stereotactic biopsy of diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma: a single-center experience. World Neurosurg 101:584–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.02.088 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Coca HA, Cebula H, Benmekhbi M, Chenard MP, Entz-Werle N, Proust F (2016) Diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas in children: interest of robotic frameless assisted biopsy. A technical note. Neurochirurgie 62:327–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuchi.2016.07.005 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Lefranc M, Capel C, Pruvot-Occean A-S, Fichten A, Desenclos C, Toussaint P, Le Gars D, Peltier J (2015) Frameless robotic stereotactic biopsies: a consecutive series of 100 cases. J Neurosurg 122:342–352. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.9.JNS14107.Disclosure CrossRefPubMed

17.

Miller BA, Salehi A, Limbrick DDJ, Smyth MD (2017) Applications of a robotic stereotactic arm for pediatric epilepsy and neurooncology surgery. J Neurosurg Pediatr 20:364–370. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.5.PEDS1782 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Quick-Weller J, Tritt S, Behmanesh B, Mittelbronn M, Spyrantis A, Dinc N, Weise L, Seifert V, Marquardt G, Freiman TM (2017) Biopsies of pediatric brainstem lesions display low morbidity but strong impact on further treatment decisions. J Clin Neurosci 44:254–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.028 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Haegelen C, Touzet G, Reyns N, Maurage C-A, Ayachi M, Blond S (2010) Stereotactic robot-guided biopsies of brain stem lesions: experience with 15 cases. Neurochirurgie 56:363–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuchi.2010.05.006 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Grimm F, Naros G, Gutenberg A, Keric N, Giese A, Gharabaghi A (2015) Blurring the boundaries between frame-based and frameless stereotaxy: feasibility study for brain biopsies performed with the use of a head-mounted robot. J Neurosurg 123:737–742. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.12.JNS141781 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Glauser D, Fankhauser H, Epitaux M, Hefti JL, Jaccottet A (1995) Neurosurgical robot Minerva: first results and current developments. J Image Guid Surg 1:266–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-712X(1995)1:5<266::AID-IGS2>3.0.CO;2-8 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Willems PWA, Noordmans HJ, Ramos LMP, Taphoorn MJB, Berkelbach van der Sprenkel JW, Viergever MA, Tulleken CAF (2003) Clinical evaluation of stereotactic brain biopsies with an MKM-mounted instrument holder. Acta Neurochir 145:889–897; discussion 897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-003-0112-4 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bekelis K, Radwan TA, Desai A, Roberts DW (2012) Frameless robotically targeted stereotactic brain biopsy: feasibility, diagnostic yield, and safety. J Neurosurg 116:1002–1006. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.1.JNS111746 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Minchev G, Kronreif G, Martínez-Moreno M, Dorfer C, Micko A, Mert A, Kiesel B, Widhalm G, Knosp E, Wolfsberger S (2016) A novel miniature robotic guidance device for stereotactic neurosurgical interventions: preliminary experience with the iSYS1 robot. J Neurosurg 126:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.1.JNS152005. CrossRef

25.

Dlaka D, Švaco M, Chudy D, Jerbić B, Šekoranja B, Šuligoj F, Vidaković J, Almahariq F, Romić D, Svaco M, Chudy D, Jerbic B, Sekoranja B, Suligoj F, Vidakovic J, Almahariq F, Romic D (2017) Brain biopsy performed with the RONNA G3 system: a case study on using a novel robotic navigation device for stereotactic neurosurgery. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg e1884. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1884

26.

Nathoo N, Cavusoglu MC, Vogelbaum MA, Barnett GH (2005) In touch with robotics: neurosurgery for the future. Neurosurgery 56:421–433CrossRefPubMed

27.

Fomenko A, Serletis D (2017) Robotic stereotaxy in cranial neurosurgery: a qualitative systematic review. Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyx576

28.

Ughratdar I, Samuel M, Ashkan K (2015) Technological advances in deep brain stimulation. J Parkinsons Dis 5:483–496. https://doi.org/10.3233/JPD-150579 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Marcus HJ, Payne CJ, Hughes-Hallett A, Marcus AP, Yang G-Z, Darzi A, Nandi D (2016) Regulatory approval of new medical devices: cross sectional study. BMJ 353. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2587

30.

Gupta P, Schomburg J, Krishna S, Adejoro O, Wang Q, Marsh B, Nguyen A, Genere JR, Self P, Lund E, Konety BR (2017) Development of a classification scheme for examining adverse events associated with medical devices, specifically the DaVinci surgical system as reported in the FDA MAUDE database. J Endourol 31:27–31. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0396 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Georgiopoulos M, Ellul J, Chroni E, Constantoyannis C (2018) Efficacy, safety, and duration of a frameless fiducial-less brain biopsy versus frame-based stereotactic biopsy: a prospective randomized study. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 79:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1602697 PubMedCrossRef

32.

Khatab S, Spliet W, Woerdeman PA (2014) Frameless image-guided stereotactic brain biopsies: emphasis on diagnostic yield. Acta Neurochir 156:1441–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2145-2 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Frati A, Pichierri A, Bastianello S, Raco A, Santoro A, Esposito V, Giangaspero F, Salvati M (2011) Frameless stereotactic cerebral biopsy: our experience in 296 cases. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 89:234–245. https://doi.org/10.1159/000325704 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Harrisson SE, Shooman D, Grundy PL (2012) A prospective study of the safety and efficacy of frameless, pinless electromagnetic image-guided biopsy of cerebral lesions. Neurosurgery 70:29–33; discussion 33. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e31822d75af PubMedCrossRef

35.

Bradac O, Steklacova A, Nebrenska K, Vrana J, de Lacy P, Benes V (2017) Accuracy of VarioGuide frameless stereotactic system against frame-based stereotaxy: prospective, randomized, single-center study. World Neurosurg 104:831–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.04.104 CrossRefPubMed

36.

Kulkarni AV, Guha A, Lozano A, Bernstein M (1998) Incidence of silent hemorrhage and delayed deterioration after stereotactic brain biopsy. J Neurosurg 89:31–35. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1998.89.1.0031 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Rossetti G, Milli L, Giannotti F, Pedreschi D (2017) Forecasting success via early adoptions analysis: a data-driven study. PLoS One 12:e0189096. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189096 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Cardinale F, Rizzi M, d’Orio P, Casaceli G, Arnulfo G, Narizzano M, Scorza D, De Momi E, Nichelatti M, Redaelli D, Sberna M, Moscato A, Castana L (2017) A new tool for touch-free patient registration for robot-assisted intracranial surgery: application accuracy from a phantom study and a retrospective surgical series. Neurosurg Focus 42:E8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.2.FOCUS16539 CrossRefPubMed

39.

Vakharia VN, Sparks R, Rodionov R, Vos S, Dorfer C, Miller J, Nilsson D, Tisdall M, Wolfsberger S, McEvoy A, Miserocchi A, Winston G, O’Keeffe A, Ourselin S, Duncan J (2017) Computer assisted planning for the insertion of stereoelectroencephalography electrodes for the investigation of drug resistant focal epilepsy: an external validation study. J Neurosurg JNS17-1826

40.

Beriault S, Subaie FA, Collins DL, Sadikot AF, Pike GB (2012) A multi-modal approach to computer-assisted deep brain stimulation trajectory planning. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 7:687–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-012-0768-4 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: systematic review and bibliometric analysis
Authors: Hani J. Marcus
Vejay N. Vakharia
Sebastien Ourselin
John Duncan
Martin Tisdall
Kristian Aquilina
Publication date: 01-07-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Child's Nervous System / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 0256-7040
Electronic ISSN: 1433-0350
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-018-3821-y

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: systematic review and bibliometric analysis

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Primary normocephalic pancraniosynostosis detected incidentally after an accidental head injury: a case report and review of the literature

Letter to the editor Management and outcome of treating pediatric medulloblastoma

Use of black-bone MRI in the diagnosis of the patients with posterior plagiocephaly

MRI in mild pediatric traumatic brain injury: diagnostic overkill or useful tool?

Cannabinoid-induced alteration of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) prior to intradural spinal tumor removal: a nasty surprise

Risk of mild head injury in preschool children: relationship to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms