Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Role of endoscopic surgical biopsy in diagnoses of intraventricular/periventricular tumors: review of literature including a monocentric case series

  • Review article
  • Published:
Acta Neurologica Belgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The intra- and periventricular location tumor (IPVT) of a brain remains a hard challenge for the neurosurgeon because of the deep location and eloquent anatomic associations. Due to this high risk of iatrogenic injury, many surgeons elect to perform biopsies of such lesions to establish a diagnosis. On the one hand, stereotaxic needle biopsy (SNB) is a minimally invasive procedure but with a significant risk of complications and a high risk of lack of tissue for molecular analyses for this region [Fukushima in Neurosurgery 2:110–113 (1978)]; on the other hand, the use of endoscopic intraventricular biopsy (EIB) allows for diagnosis with minimal surgical intervention [Iwamoto et al. in Ann Neurol 64(suppl. 6):628–634 (2008)]. IPVTs and related CSF pathway obstructions can be safely and effectively treated with endoscopic techniques. It is not possible to compare EIB with diagnoses made by any other method or with the established treatment. We aim to analyze the accuracy of EIB results by comparing them with results of biopsies performed later, in other methods and thereby evaluating the treatment evolution considering our personal experience. The difficulties and complications encountered are presented and compared with those reported in the literature to obtain the best review possible for this topic. A systematic review of literature was done using MEDLINE, the NIH Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar yielded 1.951 cases for EIB and 1912 for SNB, according to standard systemic review techniques. Review was conducted on 50 studies describing surgical procedures for lesions intra- and para-ventricular. The primary outcome measure was a diagnostic success. We also consider 20 patients with IPVT treated in our department. Clinical characteristics and surgical outcome were evaluated and a systematic review of the literature was performed. Overall, all our biopsies were diagnostic, with a positive histologic sample in 100% of our patients. 8 patients underwent a concurrent endoscopic third ventriculostomy. 4 patients underwent a concurrent ventriculostomy combined with septostomy. For 1 patient was necessary the only septostomy combined with biopsy. Every case has obtained a histological diagnosis. The percentage of complications was very low with only 1 case of post-operative infection and 1 case of hemorrhage. It was impossible to create a specific comparison from literature data of IPVTs between a stereotactic and endoscopic procedure, it presents only the collection of pineal gland tumor [Kelly in Neurosurgery 25(02):185–194 (1989); Quick-Weller in World Neurosurgery 96:124–128 (2016)] or unknown location of the lesion in major review [Marenco-Hillembrand et al. in Front Oncol 8:558 (2018)]. The present study aims to report our experience with the surgical management of IPVTs. The EIB sample yields an accurate histologic diagnosis tumor, with a positive histologic sample in 87, 95% of patients. The choice of the appropriate procedure should consider not only the preference and the experience of the neurosurgeon but also the several other variables as the location. While some periventricular lesions are better approached by endoscopic techniques, others are more suited for stereotactic-guided approaches. The ability to perform an EIB and relieve tumor-associated hydrocephalus by neuroendoscopy is considered to be a benefit of this procedure since this is less invasive than other treatments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

IPVTs:

Intraventricular, periventricular tumors

GTR:

Gross total resection

STR:

Subtotal resection

EIB:

Endoscopic intraventricular biopsy

ETV:

Endoscopic third ventriculostomy

GBM:

Glioblastoma multiforme

SNB:

Stereotaxic needle biopsy

CT:

Computed tomography

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

References

  1. Yaşargil MG, Abdulrauf SI (2008) Surgery of intraventricular tumors. Neurosurgery. 62(6 Suppl 3):1029–1040

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ben Nsir A, Gdoura Y, Thai Q, Kassar AZ, Hattab N, Jemel H (2016) Intraventricular glioblastomas. World Neurosurg 88:126–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Henry WS (2013) Schroeder intraventricular tumors. World Neurosurg 79:e15–e17

    Google Scholar 

  4. Iijima K, Hirato M, Miyagishima T (2015) Microrecording and image-guided stereotactic biopsy of deep-seated brain tumors. J Neurosurg 123(4):978–988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmed S, Javed G, Laghari A et al (2018) Third ventricular tumors: a comprehensive literature review. Cureus 10(10):e3417

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Ahmed AI, Zaben MJ, Mathad NV, Sparrow OC (2015) Endoscopic biopsy and third ventriculostomy for the management of pineal region tumors. World Neurosurg 83(4):543–547

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fukushima T (1978) Endoscopic biopsy of intraventricular tumors with the use of a ventriculofiberscope. Neurosurgery 2:110–113

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pesce A, Palmieri M, Armocida D, Frati A, Miscusi M, Raco A (2019) Spinal mixopapillary ependymoma: the Sapienza University experience and comprehensive literature review concerning the clinical course of 1602 patients. World Neurosurg 129:245–253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chowdhry SA, Cohen AR (2013) Intraventricular neuroendoscopy: complication avoidance and management. World neurosurgery. 79(2):S15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Armocida D, Pesce A, Frati A, Miscusi M, Paglia F, Raco A (2019) Pneumoventricle of unknown origin: a personal experience and literature review of a clinical enigma. World Neurosurg 122:661–664

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee TT, Manzano GR (1997) Third ventricular glioblastoma multiforme: case report. Neurosurg Rev 20(4):291–294

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Iwamoto FM, Reiner AS, Panageas KS, Elkin EB, Abrey LE (2008) Patterns of care in elderly glioblastoma patients. Ann Neurol 64(suppl. 6):628–634

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cao Jeffrey Q, Fisher Barbara J (2012) Hypofractionated radiotherapy with or without concurrent temozolomide in elderly patients with glioblastoma multiforme: a review of ten-year single institutional experience. J Neurooncol 107:395–405

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frati A, Pesce A, Palmieri M, Celniku M, Raco A, Salvati M (2018) Surgical treatment of the septuagenarian patients suffering from brain metastases: a large retrospective observational analytic cohort-comparison study. World Neurosurg 114:e565–e572

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Giannetti AV, Alvarenga AYH, de Lima TOL, Pedrosa HA-SR, Souweidane MM (2015) Neuroendoscopic biopsy of brain lesions: accuracy and complications. J Neurosurg 122(1):34–39

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Morgenstern PF, Souweidane MM (2013) Pineal region tumors: simultaneous endoscopic third ventriculostomy and tumor biopsy. World Neurosurg 79(2S):S18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morgenstern PF, Osbun N, Schwartz TH et al (2011) Pineal region tumors: an optimal approach for simultaneous endoscopic third ventriculostomy and biopsy. Neurosurg Focus 30:E3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dominiguez-Paez M, Puch-Ramirez M, Rodriguez-Barcelo S et al (2011) Neuroendoscopic biopsy. Experience in 31 patients and literature review. Neurocirurgia (Astur) 22:419–427

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pople K, Athanasiou TC (2001) The role of endoscopic biopsy and third ventriculostomy in the management of pineal region tumours. Br J Neurosurg 15(4):305–311

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chernov MF, Kamikawa S, Yamane F, Ishihara S, Kubo O, Hori T (2006) Neurofiberscopic biopsy of tumors of the pineal region and posterior third ventricle. Neurosurgery 59(2):267–277

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Souweidane MM, Sandberg DI, Bilsky MH et al (2000) Endoscopic biopsy for tumors of the third ventricle. Pediatr Neurosurg 33:132–137

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Depreitere B, Dasi N, Rutka J et al (2007) Endoscopic biopsy for intra-ventricular tumors in children. J Neurosurg 106(5 Suppl):340–346

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tirakotai W, Hellwig D, Bertalanffy H, Riegel T (2007) The role of neuroendoscopy in the management of solid or solid-cystic intra- and periventricular tumours. Child’s Nervous Syst 23(6):653–658

    Google Scholar 

  24. Song JH, Kong D-S, Shin HJ (2010) Feasibility of neuroendoscopic biopsy of pediatric brain tumors. Child’s Nervous Syst 26(11):1593–1598

    Google Scholar 

  25. Al-Tamimi YZ, Bhargava D, Surash S, Ramirez RE, Novegno F, Crimmins DW, Chumas PD (2008) Endoscopic biopsy during third ventriculostomy in paediatric pineal region tumours. Child’s Nervous System 24(11):1323–1326

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wong T-T, Chen H-H, Liang M-L, Yen Y-S, Chang F-C (2011) Neuroendoscopy in the management of pineal tumors. Child’s Nervous Syst 27(6):949–959

    Google Scholar 

  27. Constatntini S, Mohanty A, Zymberg S et al (2013) Safety and diagnosis accuracy of neuroendoscopic biopsies: an international multicenter study. J Neurosurg Pediatr 11:704–709

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stachura K, Libionka W, Czepko R (2005) The use of neuroendoscopy in the treatment of intraventricular or paraventricular brain tumors. Neurol Neurochir Pol 39:101–107

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fiorindi A, Longatti P (2008) A restricted neuroendoscopic approach for pathological diagnosis of intraventricular and paraventricular tumours. Acta Neurochir 150:1235–1239

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hayashi N, Murai H, Ishihara S et al (2011) Nationwide investigation of the current status of therapeutic neuroendoscopy for ventricular and paraventricular tumors in Japan. J Neurosurg 115:1143–1157

    Google Scholar 

  31. O’Brien DF, Hayhurst C, Pizer B, Mallucci CL (2006) Outcomes in patients undergoing single-trajectory endoscopic third ventriculostomy and endoscopic biopsy for midline tumors presenting with obstructive hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg Pediatr 105(3):219–226

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kinfe TM, Capelle H-H, Mirzayan MJ, Boschert J, Weigel R, Krauss JK (2011) Stereotactic versus endoscopic surgery in periventricular lesions. Acta Neurochir 153(3):517–526

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mohanty A, Santosh V, Devi BI et al (2011) Efficacy of simultaneous single-trajectory endoscopic tumor biopsy and endoscopic cerebrospinal fluid diversion procedures in intra- and paraventricular tumors. Neurosurg Focus 30:E4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Apuzzo ML, Sabshin JK (1983) Computed tomographic guidance stereotaxis in the management of intracranial mass lesions. Neurosurgery 12:277–285

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Apuzzo ML, Chandrasoma PT, Zelman V, Giannotta SL, Weiss MH (1984) Computed tomographic guidance stereotaxis in the management of lesions of the third ventricular region. Neurosurgery 15:502–508

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hall WA (1998) The safety and efficacy of stereotactic biopsy for intracranial lesions. Cancer 82(9):1749–1755

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kellermann SG, Hamisch CA, Rueß D, Blau T, Goldbrunner R, Treuer H, Grau SJ, Ruge MI (2017) Stereotactic biopsy in elderly patients: risk assessment and impact on treatment decision. J Neurooncol 134(2):303–307

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pinto PH, Nigri F, Gobbi GN, Caparelli-Daquer EM (2016) Conversion technique from neuroendoscopy to microsurgery in ventricular tumors: technical note. Surg Neurol Int 7:S785–S789

    Google Scholar 

  39. Raco A, Pesce A, Fraschetti F, Frati A, D’Andrea G, Cimatti M, Acqui M (2017) Motor outcomes after surgical resection of lesions involving the motor pathway: a prognostic evaluation scale. World Neurosurg 103:748–756

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Naftel RP, Shannon CN, Reed GT et al (2011) Small-ventricle neuroendoscopy for pediatric brain tumor management. J Neurosurg Pediatr 7:104–110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Apuzzo ML, Chandrasoma PT, Cohen D, Zee CS, Zelman V (1987) Computed imaging stereotaxy: experience and perspective related to 500 procedures applied to brain masses. Neurosurgery 20:930–937

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Almenawer SA, Badhiwala JH, Alhazzani W (2015) Biopsy versus partial versus gross total resection in older patients with high-grade glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro Oncol 17(6):868–881

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Armocida D, Pesce A, Di Giammarco F, Frati A, Santoro A, Salvati M (2019) Long term survival in patients suffering from glio-blastoma multiforme: a single-center observational cohort study. Diagnostics 9(4):209

    CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Almadani A, Dixit S, Rowland-hill C, Achawal S, Rajaraman C, O’Reilly G, Highley R, Hussain M, Baker L, Gill L, Morris H (2018) Management of elderly patients with glioblastoma-multiforme—a systematic review. Br J Radiol 91(1088):20170271

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Salvati M, Pesce A, Palmieri M, Brunetto GMF, Santoro A, Frati A (2019) The role and real effect of an iterative surgical approach for the management of recurrent high-grade glioma: an observational analytic cohort study. World Neurosurg 124:e480–e488

    Google Scholar 

  46. Frati A, Pesce A, D’Andrea G, Fraschetti F, Salvati M, Cimatti M, Raco A (2018) A purely functional Imaging based approach for transcortical resection of lesion involving the dominant atrium: towards safer, imaging-guided, tailored cortico-leucotomies. J Clin Neurosci 50:252–261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Raco A, Pesce A, Fraschetti F, D’Andrea G, Polli FM, Acqui M, Frati A (2018) Risk of postoperative performance status worsening after resection of lesions involving the motor pathway: a multinomial logistic regression model. J Neurolog Surg Part A 79(06):453–463

    Google Scholar 

  48. Frati A, Pesce A, Palmieri M, Iasanzaniro M, Familiari P, Angelini A, Raco A (2019) Hypnosis-aided awake surgery for the management of intrinsic brain tumors versus standard awake-asleep-awake protocol: a preliminary, promising experience. World neurosurgery 121:e882–e891

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Armocida D, Marzetti F, Pesce A, Caporlingua A, D’Angelo L, Santoro A (2020) Purely meningeal intracranial relapse of melanoma brain metastases after surgical resection and immunotherapy as a unique disease progression pattern: our experience and review of the literature. World Neurosurg 1(134):150–154

    Google Scholar 

  50. Oppido PA, Fiorindi A, Benvenuti L et al (2011) Neuroendoscopic biopsy of ventricular tumors: a multicentric experience. Neurosurg Focus 30:E2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Balaña C, Capellades J, Teixidor P et al (2007) Clinical course of high grade glioma patients with a “biopsy-only” surgical approach: a need for individualised treatment. Clin Transl Oncol 9(12):797–803

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Garrido E, Fahs GR (1990) Cerebral venous and sagittal sinus thrombosis after transcallosal removal of a colloid cyst of the third ventricle: case report. Neurosurgery 26:540–542

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Marenco-Hillembrand L, Alvarado-Estrada K, Chaichana KL (2018) Contemporary surgical management of deep-seated metastatic brain tumors using minimally invasive approaches. Front Oncol 8:558

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Iyer R, Chaichana KL (2018) Minimally invasive resection of deep-seated high-grade gliomas using tubular retractors and exoscopic visualization. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 79(4):330–336

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kelly PJ (1989) Stereotactic biopsy and resection of thalamic astrocytomas. Neurosurgery 25(02):185–194

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Quick-Weller J, Lescher S, Baumgarten P, Dinc N, Bruder M, Weise MG (2016) Stereotactic Biopsy of Pineal Lesions. World Neurosurgery 96:124–128

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Dammers R, Haitsma IK, Schouten JW, Kros JM, Avezaat CJJ, Vincent AJPE (2008) Safety and efficacy of frameless and frame-based intracranial biopsy techniques. Acta Neurochir 150(1):23–29

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Miwa T, Hayashi N, Endo S, Ohira T (2015) Neuroendoscopic biopsy and the treatment of tumor-associated hydrocephalus of the ventricular and paraventricular region in pediatric patients: a nationwide study in Japan. Neurosurg Rev 38(4):693–704

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Azab WA, Nasim K, Chelghoum A, Parwez A, Salaheddin W (2014) Endoscopic biopsy of brain tumors: does the technique matter? Surg Neurol Int 5:159

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Waldron JS, Tihan T (2003) Epidemiology and pathology of intraventricular tumors. Neurosurg Clin N Am 14:469–482

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Cappabianca P, Cinalli G, Gangemi M et al (2008) Application of neuroendoscopy to intraventricular lesions. Neurosurgery 62(Suppl 2):575–598

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Feletti A, Marton E, Fiorindi A, Longatti P (2013) Neuroendoscopic aspiration of tumors in the posterior third ventricle and aqueduct lumen: a technical update. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 155(8):1467–1473

    Google Scholar 

  63. Hambly NM, Farrell MA, Scanlon TG, McErlean A, Kavanagh EC (2009) Case report. Glioblastoma multiforme presenting as a haemorrhagic minimally enhancing mass of the trigone. Br J Radiol. 82(982):204–207

    Google Scholar 

  64. Akiyama Y, Wanibuchi M, Mikami T (2015) Rigid endoscopic resection of deep-seated or intraventricular brain tumors. Neurol Res 37(3):278–282

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Roszkowski M (2006) Neuronavigation image guided surgery, current application in neurosurgery. Probl Lek 45:17–26

    Google Scholar 

  66. Cohen AR (1998) Endoscopic ventricular surgery. Pediatr Neurosurg 19(127–134):1993

    Google Scholar 

  67. Jallo GI, Morota N, Abbott R (1996) Introduction of a second working portal for neuroendoscopy. A technical note. Pediatr Neurosurg 24:56–60

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Esposito F, Di Rocco F, Zada G, Cinalli G, Schroeder HW, Mallucci C, Cavallo LM, Decq P, Chiaramonte C, Cappabianca P (2013) Intraventricular and skull base neuroendoscopy in 2012: a global survey of usage patterns and the role of intraoperative neuronavigation. World Neurosurg 80(6):709–716

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Torres-Corzo JG, Islas-Aguilar MA, Cerecedo-López CD (2018) Flexible neuroendoscopic diagnosis and management of ventricular tumors: a retrospective cohort study. World Neurosurg 118:e707–e712

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Ashour AM, Elbabaa SK, Caputy AJ, Gragnaniello C (2016) Navigation-guided endoscopic intraventricular injectable tumor model: cadaveric tumor resection model for neurosurgical training. World Neurosurg 1(96):261–266

    Google Scholar 

  71. Stachura K, Grzywna E (2016) Neuronavigation-guided endoscopy for intraventricular tumors in adult patients without hydrocephalus. Videosurg Miniinv 11:200–207

    Google Scholar 

  72. Ellenbogen R, Moores L (1997) Endoscopic management of a pineal and suprasellar germinoma with associated hydrocephalus: technical case report. Min Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery 40(01):13–16

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Ferrer E, Santamarta D, Garcia-Fructuoso G, Caral L, Rumià J (1997) Neuroendoscopic management of pineal region tumours. Acta Neurochir 139(1):12–21

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Robinson S, Cohen AR (1997) The role of neuroendoscopy in the treatment of pineal region tumors. Surg Neurol 48(4):360–367

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Gaab MR, Schroeder HW (1998) Neuroendoscopic approach to intra- ventricular lesions. J Neurosurg 88:496–505

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Decq P, Le Guerinel C, Sakka L, Roujeau T, Sol J, Palfi S, Nguyen J (2000) Endoscopic surgery of third ventricle lesions. Neurochirurgie 46(3):286–294

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Oi S, Shibata M, Tominaga J, Honda Y (2000) Efficacy of neuroendoscopic procedures in minimally invasive preferential management of pineal region tumors: a prospective study. J Neurosurg 93(2):245–253

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Gangemi M, Maiuri F, Colella G, Buonamassa S (2001) Endoscopic surgery for pineal region tumors. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 44(2):70–73

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Macarthur DC, Buxton N, Punt J, Vloeberghs M, Robertson IJ (2002) The role of neuroendoscopy in the management of brain tumours. Br J Neurosurg 16(5):465–470

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Yurtseven T, Ersahin Y, Demirtas E et al (2003) Neuroendoscopic biopsy for intraventricular tumors. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 46:293–299

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Yamini B, Refai D, Rubin CM, Frim DM (2004) Initial endoscopic management of pineal region tumors and associated hydrocephalus: clinical series and literature review. J Neurosurg Pediatr 100(5):437–441

    Google Scholar 

  82. Kim IY, Jung S, Moon KS, Jung TY, Kang SS (2004) Neuronavigation-guided endoscopic surgery for pineal tumors with hydrocephalus. Min Invasive Neurosurg 47(6):365–368

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Souweidane MM (2005) Endoscopic surgery for intraventricular brain tumors in patients without hydrocephalus. Oper Neurosurg 57:312–318

    Google Scholar 

  84. Luther N, Edgar MA, Dunkel IJ et al (2006) Correlation of endoscopic biopsy with tumor marker status in primary intracranial germ cell tumors. J Neurooncol 79:45–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Kumar SVR, Mohanty A, Santosh V, Satish S, Devi BI, Praharaj SS et al (2007) Endoscopic options in management of posterior third ventricular tumors. Childs Nerv Syst 23:1135–1145

    Google Scholar 

  86. Prat R, Galeano I (2009) Endoscopic biopsy of foramen of Monro and third ventricle lesion guided by frameless neuronavigation: usefulness and limitation. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 111:579–582

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Ahn ES, Goumnerova L (2010) Endoscopic biopsy of brain tumors in children: diagnostic success and utility in guiding treatment strategies. J NeurosurgPediatr 5:255–262

    Google Scholar 

  88. Chibbaro S, Di Rocco F, Makiese O, Reiss A, Poczos P, Mirone G, Romano A (2012) Neuroendoscopic management of posterior third ventricle and pineal region tumors: technique, limitation, and possible complication avoidance. Neurosurg Rev 35(3):331–340

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Ros-Sanjuán Á, Ros-López B, Ibáñez-Botella G, Domínguez-Páez M, Carrasco-Brenes A, Arráez-Sánchez MÁ (2018) Neuroendoscopic biopsy: analysis of a series of 80 patients. Neurosurg Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-018-1046-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Oertel J, Keiner D (2019) Visual-controlled endoscopic biopsy of paraventricular intraparenchymal tumors. World Neurosurg 1(126):e208–e218

    Google Scholar 

  91. Stachura K, Grzywna E, Krzyżewski RM, Kwinta BM, Adamek D, Moskała MM (2019) Endoscopic biopsy of intra- and paraventricular brain tumors. Videosurg Other Miniinvasive Techniq 14(1):107–113

    Google Scholar 

  92. Yu X, Liu Z, Tian Z, Li S, Huang H, Xiu B, Zhao Q, Liu L, Jing W (2000) Stereotactic biopsy for intracranial space-occupying lesions: a clinical analysis of 550 cases. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 75:103–108

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Kreth FW, Muacevic A, Medele R, Bise K, Meyer T, Reulen HJ (2001) The risk of haemorrhage after image-guided stereotactic biopsy of intra-axial brain tumors a prospective study. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 143:539–545

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Yamada K, Goto S, Kochi M, Ushio Y (2004) Stereotactic biopsy for multifocal, diffuse, and deep-seated brain tumors using Leksell’s system. J Clin Neurosci 11:263–267

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Smith JS, Quinones-Hinojosa A, Barbaro NM, McDermott MW (2005) Frame-based stereotactic biopsy remains an important diagnostic tool with distinct advantages over frameless stereotactic biopsy. J Neurooncol 73:173–179

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Qin F, Huang ZC, Cai MQ, Xu XF, Lu TT, Dong Q, Wu AM, Lu ZZ, Zhao C, Guo Y (2018) Stereotactic biopsy in the accurate diagnosis of lesions in the brain stem and deep brain. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 98(22):1771–1774

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Iijima K, Hirato M, Miyagishima T, Horiguchi K, Sugawara K, Hirato J, Yokoo H, Yoshimoto Y (2015) Microrecording and image-guided stereotactic biopsy of deep-seated brain tumors J Neurosurg. 123(4):978–988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Hussain I, Abdel-Latif AM, Souweidane MM (2016) Intraventricular and paraventricular tumors. In: Torres-Corzo JM, Rangel-Castilla J (eds) Neuroendoscopic Surgery. Thieme, New York, pp 127–143

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded by any association.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Neurosciences Department, Neurosurgery Division, “Sapienza” University, AOU Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy

    Luca D’Angelo, Daniele Armocida, Luigi Sampirisi, Francesco Paglia, Luigi Valentino Berra & Antonio Santoro

  2. Azienda Ospedaliera Policlinico Umberto I, Viale del policlinico, 155–1039, 00189, Rome, Italy

    Daniele Armocida

Authors
  1. Luca D’Angelo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniele Armocida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luigi Sampirisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francesco Paglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Luigi Valentino Berra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Antonio Santoro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniele Armocida.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. We wish to draw the attention of the Editor to the following facts which may be considered as potential conflicts of interest and to significant financial contributions to this work.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. The patient has consented to the submission of this review article to the journal. We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us. We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In doing so, we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property. We further confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript that has involved either experimental animals or human patients has been conducted with the ethical approval of all relevant bodies and that such approvals are acknowledged within the manuscript. We understand that the Corresponding Author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including Editorial Manager and direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs. We confirm that we have provided a current, correct email address which is accessible by the Corresponding Author and which has been configured to accept email from.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

D’Angelo, L., Armocida, D., Sampirisi, L. et al. Role of endoscopic surgical biopsy in diagnoses of intraventricular/periventricular tumors: review of literature including a monocentric case series. Acta Neurol Belg 120, 517–530 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-020-01299-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13760-020-01299-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation