Comparison of anatomical-based vs. nTMS-based risk stratification model for predicting postoperative motor outcome and extent of resection in brain tumor surgery.

BACKGROUND: Two statistical models have been established to evaluate characteristics associated with postoperative motor outcome in patients with glioma associated to the motor cortex (M1) or the corticospinal tract (CST). One model is based on a clinicoradiological prognostic sum score (PrS) while the other one relies on navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) and diffusion-tensor-imaging (DTI) tractography. The objective was to compare the models regarding their prognostic value for postoperative motor outcome and extent of resection (EOR) with the aim of developing a combined, improved model. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive prospective cohort of patients who underwent resection for motor associated glioma between 2008 and 2020, and received a preoperative nTMS motor mapping with nTMS-based diffusion tensor imaging tractography. The primary outcomes were the EOR and the motor outcome (on the day of discharge and 3 months postoperatively according to the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) grading). For the nTMS model, the infiltration of M1, tumor-tract distance (TTD), resting motor threshold (RMT) and fractional anisotropy (FA) were assesed. For the PrS score (ranging from 1 to 8, lower scores indicating a higher risk), we assessed tumor margins, volume, presence of cysts, contrast agent enhancement, MRI index (grading white matter infiltration), preoperative seizures or sensorimotor deficits. RESULTS: Two hundred and three patients with a median age of 50 years (range: 20-81 years) were analyzed of whom 145 patients (71.4%) received a GTR. The rate of transient new motor deficits was 24.1% and of permanent new motor deficits 18.8%. The nTMS model demonstrated a good discrimination ability for the short-term motor outcome at day 7 of discharge (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.72-0.86) and the long-term motor outcome after 3 months (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.71-0.87). The PrS score was not capable to predict the postoperative motor outcome in this cohort but was moderately associated with the EOR (AUC = 0.64; CI 0.55-0.72). An improved, combined model was calculated to predict the EOR more accurately (AUC = 0.74, 95 %CI: 0.65-0.83). CONCLUSION: The nTMS model was superior to the clinicoradiological PrS model for potentially predicting the motor outcome. A combined, improved model was calculated to estimate the EOR. Thus, patient counseling and surgical planning in patients with motor-associated tumors should be performed using functional nTMS data combined with tractography.

Does stereoscopic imaging improve the memorization of medical imaging by neurosurgeons? Experience of a single institution.

Stereoscopic imaging has increasingly been used in anatomical teaching and neurosurgery. The aim of our study was to analyze the potential utility of stereoscopic imaging as a tool for memorizing neurosurgical patient cases compared to conventional monoscopic visualization. A total of 16 residents and 6 consultants from the Department of Neurosurgery at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin were recruited for the study. They were divided into two equally experienced groups. A comparative analysis of both imaging modalities was conducted in which four different cases were assessed by the participants. Following the image assessment, two questionnaires, one analyzing the subjective judgment using the 5-point Likert Scale and the other assessing the memorization and anatomical accuracy, were completed by all participants. Both groups had the same median year of experience (5) and stereoacuity (≤ 75 s of arc). The analysis of the first questionnaire demonstrated significant subjective superiority of the monoscopic imaging in evaluation of the pathology (median: monoscopic: 4; stereoscopic: 3; p = 0.020) and in handling of the system (median: monoscopic: 5; stereoscopic: 2; p < 0.001). The second questionnaire showed that the anatomical characterization of the pathologies was comparable between both visualization methods. Most participants rated the stereoscopic visualization as worse compared to the monoscopic visualization, probably due to a lack of familiarity with the newer technique. Stereoscopic imaging, however, was not objectively inferior to traditional monoscopic imaging for anatomical comprehension. Further methodological developments and incorporation in routine clinical workflows will most likely enhance the usability and acceptance of stereoscopic visualization.

Hands-free Adjustment of the Microscope in Microneurosurgery.

BACKGROUND: In microneurosurgery, the operating microscope plays a vital role. The classical neurosurgical operation is bimanual, that is, the microsurgical instruments are operated with both hands. Often, operations have to be carried out in narrow corridors at the depth of several centimeters. With current technology, the operator must manually adjust the field of view during surgery-which poses a disruption in the operating flow. Until now, technical adjuncts existed in the form of a mouthpiece to move the stereo camera unit or voice commands and foot pedals to control other interaction tasks like optical configuration. However, these have not been widely adopted due to usability issues. This study tests 2 novel hands-free interaction concepts based on head positioning and gaze tracking as an attempt to reduce the disruption during microneurosurgery and increase the efficiency of the user. METHODS: Technical equipment included the Pentero 900 microscope (Carl Zeiss Microscopy GmbH, Jena, Germany), HTC Vive Pro (HTC, Taoyuan District (HQ), Taiwan), and an inbuilt 3D-printed target probe. Eleven neurosurgeons including 7 residents and 4 consultants participated in the study. The tasks created for this study were with the intention to mimic real microneurosurgical tasks to maintain applicative accuracy while testing the interaction concepts. The tasks involved visualization system adjustment to the specific target and touching the target. The first trial was conducted in a virtual reality setting applying the novel hands-free interaction concepts, and the second trial was conducted performing the same tasks on a 3D-printed target probe using manual field of view adjustment. The participants completed both trials with the same predetermined tasks, in order to validate the feasibility of the novel technology. The data collected for this study were obtained with the help of review protocols, detailed post-trial interviews, video and audio recordings, along with time measurements while performing the tasks. RESULTS: The user study conducted at the Charité Hospital in Berlin found that the gaze-tracking and head-positioning- based microscope adjustment were 18% and 29% faster, respectively, than the classical bimanual adjustment of the microscope. Focused user interviews showed the users' proclivity for the new interaction concepts, as they offered minimal disruption between the simultaneous target selection and camera position adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: The hands-free interaction concepts presented in this study demonstrated a more efficient execution of the microneurosurgical tasks than the classical manual microscope and were assessed to be more preferable by both residents and consultant neurosurgeons.