Abstract
Background and objectives
Robot-assisted biopsies have gained popularity in the last years. Most robotic procedures are performed with a floor-based robotic arm. Recently, Medtronic Stealth Autoguide, a miniaturized robotic arm that work together with an optical neuronavigation system, was launched. Its application in pediatric cases is relatively unexplored. In this study, we retrospectively report our experience using the Stealth Autoguide, for frameless stereotactic biopsies in pediatric patients.
Methods
Pediatric patients who underwent stereotactic biopsy using the Stealth Autoguide cranial robotic platform from July 2020 to May 2023 were included in this study. Clinical, neuroradiological, surgical, and histological data were collected and analyzed.
Results
Nineteen patients underwent 20 procedures (mean age was 9-year-old, range 1–17). In four patients, biopsy was part of a more complex surgical procedure (laser interstitial thermal therapy — LITT). The most common indication was diffuse intrinsic brain stem tumor, followed by diffuse supratentorial tumor. Nine procedures were performed in prone position, eight in supine position, and three in lateral position. Facial surface registration was adopted in six procedures, skull-fixed fiducials in 14. The biopsy diagnostic tissue acquisition rate was 100% in the patients who underwent only biopsy, while in the biopsy/LITT group, one case was not diagnostic. No patients developed clinically relevant postoperative complications.
Conclusion
The Stealth Autoguide system has proven to be safe, diagnostic, and highly accurate in performing stereotactic biopsies for both supratentorial and infratentorial lesions in the pediatric population.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and material
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Legnani FG, Franzini A, Mattei L et al (2019) Image-guided biopsy of intracranial lesions with a small robotic device (iSYS1): a prospective, exploratory pilot study. Operative Surg 17:403–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opy411
Kojima Y, Uda T, Kawashima T et al (2022) Primary experiences with robot-assisted navigation-based frameless stereo-electroencephalography: higher accuracy than neuronavigation-guided manual adjustment. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 62:361–368. https://doi.org/10.2176/jns-nmc.2022-0010
Krieger MD, Chandrasoma PT, Zee C-S, Apuzzo MLJ (1998) Role of stereotactic biopsy in the diagnosis and management of brain tumors. Semin Surg Oncol 14:13–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2388(199801/02)14:1%3c13::AID-SSU3%3e3.0.CO;2-5
Ma F-Z, Liu D-F, Yang A-C et al (2022) Application of the robot-assisted implantation in deep brain stimulation. Front Neurorobot 16:996685. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2022.996685
Cardinale F (2016) Stereoelectroencephalography: application accuracy, efficacy, and safety. World Neurosurgery 94:570–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.07.070
Gonzalez-Martinez J, Vadera S, Mullin J et al (2014) Robot-assisted stereotactic laser ablation in medically intractable epilepsy: operative technique. Operative Neurosurgery 10:167–173. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000286
De Benedictis A, Trezza A, Carai A et al (2017) Robot-assisted procedures in pediatric neurosurgery. Neurosurg Focus 42:E7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.2.FOCUS16579
Haegelen C, Touzet G, Reyns N et al (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
Lefranc M, Capel C, Pruvot-Occean A-S et al (2015) Frameless robotic stereotactic biopsies: a consecutive series of 100 cases. JNS 122:342–352. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.9.JNS14107
Varma TRK, Eldridge P (2006) Use of the NeuroMate stereotactic robot in a frameless mode for functional neurosurgery. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 2:107–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.88
Kreatsoulas DC, Vignolles-Jeong J, Ambreen Y et al (2023) Surgical characteristics of intracranial biopsy using a frameless stereotactic robotic platform: a single-center experience. Operative Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.1227/ons.0000000000000999
Früh A, Schaumann A, Cohrs G et al (2023) Biopsies of caudal brainstem tumors in pediatric patients—a single-center retrospective case series. World Neurosurgery 177:e84–e93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.05.108
Alexander H, Fayed I, Oluigbo CO (2020) Rigid cranial fixation for robot-assisted stereoelectroencephalography in toddlers: technical considerations. Operative Surg 18:614–620. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opz247
Sickler RW, Chandran AS, Funke ME et al (2023) Comparison of 2 robotic systems for pediatric stereoelectroencephalography implantation. World Neurosurgery 182:e486–e492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.11.125
Niznik T, Grossen A, Shi H et al (2023) Learning curve in robotic stereoelectroencephalography: single platform experience. World Neurosurgery 182:e442–e452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.11.119
Minchev G, Kronreif G, Martínez-Moreno M et al (2017) A novel miniature robotic guidance device for stereotactic neurosurgical interventions: preliminary experience with the iSYS1 robot. JNS 126:985–996. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.1.JNS152005
Fomenko A, Serletis D (2018) Robotic stereotaxy in cranial neurosurgery: a qualitative systematic review. Neurosurgery 83:642–650. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyx576
Funding
No funding was received for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Editing and drafting manuscript: MDC, PS, CR. Reviewing pre-operative and post-operative images: DC, GM. Reviewing images on neuronavigation work-station: GM. Reviewing the literature: MDC, PS, LDM; Reviewing patients charts and history: MDC, LDM. Critically revising the work: GC, PS. Approved the final version of the work on behalf of all authors: PS. Supervision: GC. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants conformed to the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical standards. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents for publication of the details of the medical case and associated images. Because this was a retrospective case report and all procedures performed were part of routine care, the study was exempt from ethical approval by the institutional review board.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Spennato, P., Di Costanzo, M., Mirone, G. et al. Image-guided biopsy of intracranial lesions in children, with a small robotic device: a case series. Childs Nerv Syst (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-024-06349-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-024-06349-0