OBJECTIVEAlthough rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality have become relatively low in patients undergoing transnasal transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) for pituitary adenoma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) fistulas remain a major driver of postoperative morbidity. Persistent CSF fistulas harbor the potential for headache and meningitis. The aim of this study was to investigate whether neural network–based models can reliably identify patients at high risk for intraoperative CSF leakage.METHODSFrom a prospective registry, patients who underwent endoscopic TSS for pituitary adenoma were identified. Risk factors for intraoperative CSF leaks were identified using conventional statistical methods. Subsequently, the authors built a prediction model for intraoperative CSF leaks based on deep learning.RESULTSIntraoperative CSF leaks occurred in 45 (29%) of 154 patients. No risk factors for CSF leaks were identified using conventional statistical methods. The deep neural network–based prediction model classified 88% of patients in the test set correctly, with an area under the curve of 0.84. Sensitivity (83%) and specificity (89%) were high. The positive predictive value was 71%, negative predictive value was 94%, and F1 score was 0.77. High suprasellar Hardy grade, prior surgery, and older age contributed most to the predictions.CONCLUSIONSThe authors trained and internally validated a robust deep neural network–based prediction model that identifies patients at high risk for intraoperative CSF. Machine learning algorithms may predict outcomes and adverse events that were previously nearly unpredictable, thus enabling safer and improved patient care and better patient counseling.

No abstract

OBJECTIVEThe COVID-19 pandemic has forced many countries into lockdown and has led to the postponement of nonurgent neurosurgical procedures. Although stress has been investigated during this pandemic, there are no reports on anxiety in neurosurgical patients undergoing nonurgent surgical procedures.METHODSNeurosurgical patients admitted to hospitals in eastern Lombardy for nonurgent surgery after the lockdown prospectively completed a pre- and postoperative structured questionnaire. Recorded data included demographics, pathology, time on surgical waiting list, anxiety related to COVID-19, primary pathology and surgery, safety perception during hospital admission before and after surgery, and surgical outcomes. Anxiety was measured with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Descriptive statistics were computed on the different variables and data were stratified according to pathology (oncological vs nononcological). Three different models were used to investigate which variables had the greatest impact on anxiety, oncological patients, and safety perception, respectively. Because the variables (Xs) were of a different nature (qualitative and quantitative), mostly asymmetrical, and related to outcome (Y) by nonlinear relationships, a machine learning approach composed of three steps (1, random forest growing; 2, relative variable importance measure; and 3, partial dependence plots) was chosen.RESULTSOne hundred twenty-three patients from 10 different hospitals were included in the study. None of the patients developed COVID-19 after surgery. State and trait anxiety were reported by 30.3% and 18.9% of patients, respectively. Higher values of state anxiety were documented in oncological compared to nononcological patients (46.7% vs 25%; p = 0.055). Anxiety was strongly associated with worry about primary pathology, surgery, disease worsening, and with stress during waiting time, as expected. Worry about positivity to SARS-CoV-2, however, was the strongest factor associated with anxiety, even though none of the patients were infected. Neuro-oncological disease was associated with state anxiety and with worry about surgery and COVID-19. Increased bed distance and availability of hand sanitizer were associated with a feeling of safety.CONCLUSIONSThese data underline the importance of psychological support, especially for neuro-oncological patients, during a pandemic.

OBJECTIVEThe best management of veins encountered during the neurosurgical approach is still a matter of debate. Even if venous sacrifice were to lead to devastating consequences, under certain circumstances, it might prove to be desirable, enlarging the surgical field or increasing the extent of resection in tumor surgery. In this study, the authors present a large series of patients with vascular or oncological entities, in which they used indocyanine green videoangiography (ICG-VA) with FLOW 800 analysis to study the patient-specific venous flow characteristics and the management workflow in cases in which a venous sacrifice was necessary.METHODSBetween May 2011 and December 2017, 1972 patients were admitted to the authors’ division for tumor and/or neurovascular surgery. They retrospectively reviewed all cases in which ICG-VA and FLOW 800 were used intraoperatively with a specific target in the venous angiographic phase or for the management of venous sacrifice, and whose surgical videos and FLOW 800 analysis were available.RESULTSA total of 296 ICG-VA and FLOW 800 studies were performed intraoperatively. In all cases, the venous structures were clearly identifiable and were described according to the flow direction and speed. The authors therefore defined different patterns of presentation: arterialized veins, thrombosed veins, fast-draining veins with anterograde flow, slow-draining veins with anterograde flow, and slow-draining veins with retrograde flow. In 16 cases we also performed a temporary clipping test to predict the effect of the venous sacrifice by the identification of potential collateral circulation.CONCLUSIONSICG-VA and FLOW 800 analysis can provide complete and real-time intraoperative information regarding patient-specific venous drainage pattern and can guide the decision-making process regarding venous sacrifice, with a possible impact on reduction of surgical complications.

Purpose Deciding whether to re-operate patients with intracranial tumor recurrence or remnant is challenging, as the data on safety of repeated procedures is limited. This study set out to evaluate the risks for morbidity, mortality, and complications after repeated operations, and to compare those to primary operations. Methods Retrospective observational two-center study on consecutive patients undergoing microsurgical tumor resection. The data derived from independent, prospective institutional registries. The primary endpoint was morbidity at 3 months (M3), defined as significant decrease on the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). Secondary endpoints were mortality, rate and severity of complications according to the Clavien–Dindo Grade (CDG). Results 463/2403 (19.3%) were repeated procedures. Morbidity at M3 occurred in n = 290 patients (12.1%). In univariable analysis, patients undergoing repeated surgery were 98% as likely as patients undergoing primary surgery to experience morbidity (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.72–1.34, p = 0.889). In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, sex, tumor size, histology and posterior fossa location, the relationship remained stable (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 0.90–1.73, p = 0.186). Mortality was n = 10 (0.4%) at discharge and n = 95 (4.0%) at M3, without group differences. At least one complication occurred in n = 855, and the rate (35.5% vs. 35.9%, p = 0.892) and severity (CDG; p = 0.520) was similar after primary and repeated procedures. Results were reproduced in subgroup analyses for meningiomas, gliomas and cerebral metastases. Conclusions Repeated surgery for intracranial tumors does not increase the risk of morbidity. Mortality, and both the rate and severity of complications are comparable to primary operations. This information is of value for patient counseling and the informed consent process. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11060-018-03058-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

According to PROMs measuring QoL, disability, and psychological well-being, most of the patients were improved/unchanged after surgery. Since PROMs and KPS detect different aspects of the patients' health status, PROMs should be integrated in surgical outcome evaluation. Furthermore, their association with complications and with other clinical and subjective variables that could influence patient's perception of health status should be investigated.

The prognostic value of “snake-eyes” sign in spinal cord magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is unclear and the correlation with different pathological conditions has not been completely elucidated. In addition, its influence on surgical outcome has not been investigated in depth. A literature review according to PRISMA (Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols) guidelines on the prognostic significance of “snake-eyes” sign in operated patients was performed. Clinical, neuroradiological, and surgical data of three institutional patients, were also retrospectively collected. The three patients, with radiological evidence of “snake-eyes” myelopathy, underwent appropriate surgical treatment for their condition, with no new post-operative neurological deficits and good outcome at follow-up. The literature review, however, reported conflicting results: the presence of “snake-eyes” sign seems a poor prognostic factor in degenerative cervical myelopathy, even if some cases can improve after surgery. “Snake-eyes” myelopathy represents a rare form of myelopathy; pathophysiology is still unclear. The frequency of this myelopathy may be greater than previously thought and according to our literature review it is mostly a negative prognostic factor. However, from our experience, prognosis might not be so dire, especially when tailored surgical intervention is performed; therefore, surgery should always be considered and based on the complete clinical, neurophysiological, and radiological data.