Comparison of Frame-Based Versus Frameless Image-Guided Intracranial Stereotactic Brain Biopsy: A Retrospective Analysis of Safety and Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: A definitive diagnosis of brain lesions not amenable to surgery is mainly made by stereotactic needle biopsy. The diagnostic yield and safety of the frameless versus frame-based image-guided stereotactic techniques is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the safety and accuracy of frameless versus frame-based stereotactic brain biopsy techniques. METHODS: A total of 278 patients (153 men; mean age: 65.5 years) with intra-axial brain lesions underwent frame-based (n = 148) or frameless image-guided stereotactic brain biopsy (n = 130) using a minimally invasive twist drill technique during 2010-2016 at Sheba Medical Center. Demographic, imaging, and clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The diagnostic yield (>90%) did not differ significantly between groups. Overall morbidity (6.8% vs. 8.5%), incidence of permanent neurologic deficits (2.1% vs. 1.6%), mortality rate (0.7% vs. 0.8%), and postoperative computed tomography-detected asymptomatic (14.2% vs. 16.1%) and symptomatic (2.0% vs. 1.6%) bleeding also did not differ significantly between the frame-based and frameless cohorts, respectively. The diagnostic yield and complication rates related to the biopsy technique were not significantly associated with sex, age, entry angle to the skull and skull thickness, lesion location or depth, or radiologic characteristics. Diagnostic yield was significantly associated with the mean lesion volume. Smaller lesions were less diagnostic than larger lesions in both techniques (P = 0.043 frame-based and P = 0.048 frameless). CONCLUSIONS: The frameless biopsy technique is as efficient as the frame-based brain biopsy technique with a low complication rate. Lesion volume was the only predictive factor of diagnostic yield. The minimally invasive twist drill technique is safe and efficient.

[DIRECT TO IMPLANT IMMEDIATE BREAST RECONSTRUCTION USING THE FASCIAL SYSTEM IN THE INFRAMAMMARY FOLD, WITHOUT THE USE OF ACELLULAR DERMAL MATRIX].

AIMS: We present our experience of direct to implant breast reconstruction with total musculofascial coverage, without the use of ADM. BACKGROUND: The prevalence of one-stage breast reconstruction with silicone implants has increased markedly in recent years. This is attributed to advances in the surgical technique of mastectomy and to the increased rate of preventive mastectomy. The use of Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) became a common practice. Notwithstanding, ADM utilization may lead to higher postoperative complication rates. METHODS: Between 2015 to 2018, a prospective study was conducted at the Sheba Medical Center including all patients undergoing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. In this study, we included patients who underwent direct to implant reconstruction with total musculofascial coverage, without the use of ADM. We gathered demographic, oncologic and surgical features, including post-operative complications, along with aesthetic outcome. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients (25 breasts) underwent direct to implant breast reconstruction with total musculofascial coverage. The overall complication rate was 24% (6 breasts). Minor complications (5 breasts, 20%) were manifested as delayed wound healing, minimal capsular contracture, skin necrosis and minor infection. A major complication of capsular contracture occurred in one patient. Corrective surgery due to aesthetic outcome was offered to 36% of the patients. nevertheless, only 16% chose to undergo an aesthetic reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate direct to implant breast reconstruction with total musculofascial coverage is an attractive option for single stage breast reconstruction with excellent aesthetic outcomes and low complication rates. Presumably, with a careful patient selection, the complication rates can be reduced even further.