Journal of Neuro-Oncology

, Volume 73, Issue 2, pp 173–179 | Cite as

Frame-based stereotactic biopsy remains an important diagnostic tool with distinct advantages over frameless stereotactic biopsy

  • Justin S. SmithEmail author
  • Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa
  • Nicholas M. Barbaro
  • Michael W. McDermott
Clinical Study


Object: As the availability of image-guided surgical navigation systems has increased, the application of frame-based biopsy has declined at our institution, despite equivalent accuracy and safety. There are several cost issues separating the use of surgical navigation systems and stereotactic frames for simple biopsy which may have implications in this era of health care cost control. We retrospectively reviewed the UCSF experience with stereotactic brain biopsy from a 9 year period. Methods: Data were collected for 213 consecutive stereotactic brain biopsies performed at UCSF (139 frame-based and 74 frameless). There were no significant differences between the frame-based and frameless biopsy groups with regard to patient demographics, overall histopathology, proportion of nondiagnostic biopsies, or incidence of complications. General anesthesia was used for 9 (6%) and 70 (95%) of the frame-based and frameless biopsy cases, respectively. Frame-based biopsies required a mean of 114 ± 3 min of operating room time, while frameless biopsies required 185 ± 6 min (P < 0.0001). For patients admitted to our neurosurgery service who underwent frame-based (n=110) or frameless (n=52) biopsy within 24 h of admission, the mean lengths of hospital stay were 1.8 ± 0.2 and 3.2 ± 0.6 days, respectively (P=0.007). Conclusion: Frame-based and frameless stereotactic biopsy approaches were equally effective at providing a tissue diagnosis with minimum morbidity and mortality. The frame-based approach, however, required significantly less anesthesia resources, less operating room time and shorter hospital stays, and thus should still be considered a first-line approach for stereotactic brain biopsy.


brain biopsy CRW frame-based biopsy frameless biopsy Stealth stereotactic biopsy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Moriarty, TM, Quinones-Hinojosa, A, Larson, PS, Alexander, E,3rd, Gleason, PL, Schwartz, RB, Jolesz, FA, Black, PM. 2000Frameless stereotactic neurosurgery using intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging: stereotactic brain biopsyNeurosurgery4711381145Discussion 1145–1136, 2000CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    McInerney, J, Roberts, DW. 2000Frameless stereotaxy of the brainMt Sinai J Med67300310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wen, DY, Hall, WA, Miller, DA, Seljeskog, EL, Maxwell, RE. 1993Targeted brain biopsy: a comparison of freehand computed tomography-guided and stereotactic techniquesNeurosurgery,32407412Discussion 412–413Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fontaine, D, Dormont, D, Hasboun, D, Clemenceau, S, Valery, C, Oppenheim, C, Sahel, M, Marsault, C, Philippon, J, Cornu, P. 2000Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic biopsies: results in 100 consecutive casesActa Neurochir (Wien)142249255Discussion 255–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barnett, GH, Miller, DW, Weisenberger, J. 1999Frameless stereotaxy with scalp-applied fiducial markers for brain biopsy procedures: experience in 218 casesJ Neurosurg91569576PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Germano, IM, Queenan, JV. 1998Clinical experience with intracranial brain needle biopsy using frameless surgical navigationComput Aided Surg33339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorward, NL, Paleologos, TS, Alberti, O, Thomas, DG. 2002The advantages of frameless stereotactic biopsy over frame-based biopsyBr J Neurosurg16110118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorward, NL, Alberti, O, Palmer, JD, Kitchen, ND, Thomas, DG. 1999Accuracy of true frameless stereotaxy: in vivo measurement and laboratory phantom studiesTechnical note. J Neurosurg90160168Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hall, WA. 1998The safety and efficacy of stereotactic biopsy for intracranial lesionsCancer8217491755CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Apuzzo, ML, Chandrasoma, PT, Cohen, D, Zee, CS, Zelman, V. 1987Computed imaging stereotaxy: experience and perspective related to 500 procedures applied to brain massesNeurosurgery20930937Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Quinones-Hinojosa A, Sanai N, McDermott MW. (1999). Assessment of image guided accuracy using two types of disposable biopsy guides as compared to frame-based localization. American Association of Neurological Surgeons Abstract Archive (http: // = 12387), 2002Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pell, MF, Thomas, DG. 1991The initial experience with the Cosman-Roberts-Wells stereotactic systemBr J Neurosurg5123128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Whittle, IR, Denholm, SW, Elshunnar, K. 1991CT-guided stereotactic neurosurgery using the Brown-Roberts-Wells system: experience with 125 proceduresAust N Z J Surg61919928PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gumprecht, HK, Widenka, DC, Lumenta, , CB.,  1999BrainLab VectorVision Neuronavigation System: technology and clinical experiences in 131 casesNeurosurgery4497104Discussion 104–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sipos, EP, Tebo, SA, Zinreich, SJ, Long, DM, Brem, , H.,  1996In vivo accuracy testing and clinical experience with the ISG Viewing WandNeurosurgery39194202Discussion 202–194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaus, M, Steinmeier, R, Sporer, T, Ganslandt, O, Fahlbusch, R. 1997Technical accuracy of a neuronavigation system measured with a high-precision mechanical micromanipulatorNeurosurgery4114311436Discussion 1436–1437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krieger, MD, Chandrasoma, PT, Zee, CS, Apuzzo, ML. 1998Role of stereotactic biopsy in the diagnosis and management of brain tumorsSemin Surg Oncol141325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sawin, PD, Hitchon, PW, Follett, KA, Torner, JC. 1998Computed imaging-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: a risk analysis of 225 consecutive casesSurg Neurol49640649PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Field, M, Witham, TF, Flickinger, JC, Kondziolka, D, Lunsford, LD. 2001Comprehensive assessment of hemorrhage risks and outcomes after stereotactic brain biopsyJ Neurosurg94545551PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bernstein, M, Parrent, AG. 1994Complications of CT-guided stereotactic biopsy of intra-axial brain lesionsJ Neurosurg81165168PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Soo, TM, Bernstein, M, Provias, J, Tasker, R, Lozano, A, Guha, A. 1995Failed stereotactic biopsy in a series of 518 casesStereotact Funct Neurosurg64183196PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin S. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa
    • 1
  • Nicholas M. Barbaro
    • 1
  • Michael W. McDermott
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Neurological Surgery, Brain Tumor Research CenterUniversity of California at San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations