Mask-Based versus Frame-Based Gamma Knife ICON Radiosurgery in Brain Metastases: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiosurgery is performed with a diversity of instruments relying usually either on a stereotactic frame or a mask for patient head fixation. Comfort and safety efficacy of the 2 systems have never been rigorously evaluated and compared. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Between February 2016 and January 2017, 58 patients presenting with nonsmall cell lung cancer brain metastases have been treated by Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKS) with random use of a frame or a mask for fixation were included patients older than 18, with <5 brain metastases (at the exclusion of brainstem and optic pathway's locations) and no earlier history of radiotherapy. The primary outcome measure was the pain scale assessment (PSA) at the beginning of the GKS procedure. RESULTS: The PSA at the beginning of the GKS procedure was not different between the 2 groups. The PSA at the day before GKS, before magnetic resonance imaging, just after frame application, and the day after radiosurgery (departure) has shown no difference between the 2 groups. At the end of the radiosurgery itself (just after frame or mask removal) and 1 h after, the mean pain scale was higher in patients treated with the frame (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) but 2 patients were not able to tolerate the mask discomfort and had to be treated with frame. Tumor control and morbidity probability were demonstrated to be no difference between the 2 groups in this population of patients with BM not in highly functional area. The median of the extra dose to the body due to the cone-beam computed tomography was 7.5 mGy with a maximum of 35 mGy in patients treated with a mask fixation (null in the others treated with frame). Mask fixation was associated to longer treatment time although the beam on time was not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In selected patients, with brain oligo-metastases out of critical location, single-dose mask-based GKS can be done with a comfort and a safety efficacy comparable to frame-based GKS. There seems to be no clear patient data that confirm the value of the mask system with regards to comfort.

Frameless ROSA® Robot-Assisted Lead Implantation for Deep Brain Stimulation: Technique and Accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Frameless robotic-assisted surgery is an innovative technique for deep brain stimulation (DBS) that has not been assessed in a large cohort of patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate accuracy of DBS lead placement using the ROSA® robot (Zimmer Biomet) and a frameless registration. METHODS: All patients undergoing DBS surgery in our institution between 2012 and 2016 were prospectively included in an open label single-center study. Accuracy was evaluated by measuring the radial error (RE) of the first stylet implanted on each side and the RE of the final lead position at the target level. RE was measured on intraoperative telemetric X-rays (group 1), on intraoperative O-Arm® (Medtronic) computed tomography (CT) scans (group 2), and on postoperative CT scans or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in both groups. RESULTS: Of 144 consecutive patients, 119 were eligible for final analysis (123 DBS; 186 stylets; 192 leads). In group 1 (76 patients), the mean RE of the stylet was 0.57 ± 0.02 mm, 0.72 ± 0.03 mm for DBS lead measured intraoperatively, and 0.88 ± 0.04 mm for DBS lead measured postoperatively on CT scans. In group 2 (43 patients), the mean RE of the stylet was 0.68 ± 0.05 mm, 0.75 ± 0.04 mm for DBS lead measured intraoperatively; 0.86 ± 0.05 mm and 1.10 ± 0.08 mm for lead measured postoperatively on CT scans and on MRI, respectively No statistical difference regarding the RE of the final lead position was found between the different intraoperative imaging modalities and postoperative CT scans in both groups. CONCLUSION: Frameless ROSA® robot-assisted technique for DBS reached submillimeter accuracy. Intraoperative CT scans appeared to be reliable and sufficient to evaluate the final lead position.