Evaluation of the safety, accuracy, and helpfulness of the GPT-4.0 Large Language Model in neurosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Although prior work demonstrated the surprising accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) on neurosurgery board-style questions, their use in day-to-day clinical situations warrants further investigation. This study assessed GPT-4.0's responses to common clinical questions across various subspecialties of neurosurgery. METHODS: A panel of attending neurosurgeons formulated 35 general neurosurgical questions spanning neuro-oncology, spine, vascular, functional, pediatrics, and trauma. All questions were input into GPT-4.0 with a prespecified, standard prompt. Responses were evaluated by two attending neurosurgeons, each on a standardized scale for accuracy, safety, and helpfulness. Citations were indexed and evaluated against identifiable database references. RESULTS: GPT-4.0 responses were consistent with current medical guidelines and accounted for recent advances in the field 92.8 % and 78.6 % of the time respectively. Neurosurgeons reported GPT-4.0 responses providing unrealistic information or potentially risky information 14.3 % and 7.1 % of the time respectively. Assessed on 5-point scales, responses suggested that GPT-4.0 was clinically useful (4.0 ± 0.6), relevant (4.7 ± 0.3), and coherent (4.9 ± 0.2). The depth of clinical responses varied (3.7 ± 0.6), and "red flag" symptoms were missed 7.1 % of the time. Moreover, GPT-4.0 cited 86 references (2.46 citations per answer), of which only 50 % were deemed valid, and 77.1 % of responses contained at least one inappropriate citation. CONCLUSION: Current general LLM technology can offer generally accurate, safe, and helpful neurosurgical information, but may not fully evaluate medical literature or recent field advances. Citation generation and usage remains unreliable. As this technology becomes more ubiquitous, clinicians will need to exercise caution when dealing with it in practice.

Reappraisal of the types of hypoglossal canal: endocranial approach.

This study aims to classify the endocranial variations inside the Hypoglossal Canal (HC) and evaluate the elements of the HC region in terms of sizes, diameters, and distances to the nearby surgical landmarks. The present study was done on 18 adult human fixed cadaver heads bilaterally. The internal opening of HC was examined for the presence of dural or osseos septations in the canal and was classified into five types (Type 1-5). The dimensions of hypoglossal nerve (CN XII) and the distance of intracranial openings of HC from the jugular foramen and jugular tubercle were measured. The prevalence of endocranial HC types were determined on both sides as follows: type 1 (23.53% left, 6.25% right), type 2 (37.5% right, 5.88% left), type 3 (52.94% left, 25% right), type 4 (18.75% right, 17.65% left), type 5 (12.5% right). Understanding the endocranial HC types is crucial for neurosurgeons in the differential diagnosis of various intracranial pathologies for the posterior cranial fossa approach. Knowing the anatomical relationships between the adjacent structures and symmetrical organization of the HC according to the types is crucial in determining surgical strategies and preserving adjacent structures.

Perioperative management of severe brain injured patients.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide. Head injured patients may frequently require emergency neurosurgery. The perioperative TBI period is very important as many interventions done in this stage can have a profound effect on the long-term neurological outcome. This practical concise narrative review focused mainly on: 1) the management of severe TBI patients with neurosurgical lesions admitted to a spoke center (i.e. hospital without neurosurgery) and therefore needing a transfer to the hub center (i.e. hospital with neurosurgery); 2) the management of severe TBI patients with intracranial hypertension/brain herniation awaiting for neurosurgery; and 3) the neuromonitoring-oriented management in the immediate post-operative period. The proposals presented in this review mainly apply to severe TBI patients admitted to high-income countries.

Best Practices Using Ex Vivo Animal Brain Models in Neurosurgical Education to Assess Surgical Expertise.

BACKGROUND: Ex vivo animal brain simulation models are being increasingly used for neurosurgical training because these models can replicate human brain conditions. The goal of the present report is to provide the neurosurgical community interested in using ex vivo animal brain simulation models with guidelines for comprehensively and rigorously conducting, documenting, and assessing this type of research. METHODS: In consultation with an interdisciplinary group of physicians and researchers involved in ex vivo models and a review of the literature on the best practices guidelines for simulation research, we developed the "ex vivo brain model to assess surgical expertise" (EVBMASE) checklist. The EVBMASE checklist provides a comprehensive quantitative framework for analyzing and reporting studies involving these models. We applied The EVBMASE checklist to the studies reported of ex vivo animal brain models to document how current ex vivo brain simulation models are used to train surgical expertise. RESULTS: The EVBMASE checklist includes defined subsections and a total score of 20, which can help investigators improve studies and provide readers with techniques to better assess the quality and any deficiencies of the research. We classified 18 published ex vivo brain models into modified (group 1) and nonmodified (group 2) models. The mean total EVBMASE score was 11 (55%) for group 1 and 4.8 (24.2%) for group 2, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.006) mainly attributed to differences in the simulation study design section (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The present findings should help contribute to more rigorous application, documentation, and assessment of ex vivo brain simulation research.

Credentialing, Certification, and Peer Review Essentials for the Neurosurgeon.

Credentialing and certification are essential processes during hiring to ensure that the physician is competent and possesses the qualifications and skill sets claimed. Peer review ensures the continuing evolution of these skills to meet a standard of care. We have provided an overview and discussion of these processes in the United States. Credentialing is the process by which a physician is determined to be competent and able to practice, used to ensure that medical staff meets specific standards, and to grant operative privileges at an institution. Certification is a standardized affirmation of a physician's competence on a nationwide basis. Although not legally required to practice in the United States, many institutions emphasize certification for full privileges on an ongoing basis at a hospital. In the United States, peer review of adverse events is a mandatory prerequisite for accreditation. The initial lack of standardization led to the development of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act, which protects those involved in the peer review process from litigation, and the National Provider Databank, which was established as a national database to track misconduct. A focus on quality improvement in the peer review process can lead to improved performance and patient outcomes. A thorough understanding of the processes of credentialing, certification, and peer review in the United States will benefit neurosurgeons by allowing them to know what institutions are looking for as well and their rights and responsibilities in any given situation. It could also be useful to compare these policies and practices in the United States to those in other countries.

How do you manage ANTICOagulant therapy in neurosurgery? The ANTICO survey of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery (SINCH).

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulant assumption is a concern in neurosurgical patient that implies a delicate balance between the risk of thromboembolism versus the risk of peri- and postoperative hemorrhage. METHODS: We performed a survey among 129 different neurosurgical departments in Italy to evaluate practice patterns regarding the management of neurosurgical patients taking anticoagulant drugs. Furthermore, we reviewed the available literature, with the aim of providing a comprehensive but practical summary of current recommendations. RESULTS: Our survey revealed that there is a lack of knowledge, mostly regarding the indication and the strategies of anticoagulant reversal in neurosurgical clinical practice. This may be due a lack of national and international guidelines for the care of anticoagulated neurosurgical patients, along with the fact that coagulation and hemostasis are not simple topics for a neurosurgeon. CONCLUSIONS: To overcome this issue, establishment of hospital-wide policy concerning management of anticoagulated patients and developed in an interdisciplinary manner are strongly recommended.

Beyond guidelines: analysis of current practice patterns of AANS/CNS tumor neurosurgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based medicine guidelines are increasingly published and sanctioned by organized neurosurgery. However, implementation, interpretation, and use of clinical guidelines may vary substantially on a regional, national and international basis. Survey research can help bridge the gap by providing a snapshot of neurosurgeon attitudes, knowledge, and practices. The American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AANS/CNS) Section on Tumors formed a Survey Committee to formalize the process by which surveys are submitted and reviewed before distribution to our membership. The goal of this committee is to provide peer-review so that collected information will be scientifically robust and useful to the neurosurgical community. METHODS: Surveys submitted to the AANS/CNS tumor section between 2015 and 2019 were reviewed and metrics such as response rate and publication status assessed. RESULTS: Six surveys were submitted to the Survey Committee of the AANS/CNS section on tumors between 2015 and 2019. Four have been circulated to section members, of which three have been published. Response rate has averaged 19% (range 16-23%), a majority of respondents (mean 70%) practice in academic settings. CONCLUSIONS: The AANS/CNS Section on Tumors Survey Committee has and continues to help promote and improve the practice of surveying our community to answer important questions that can advance future training, research, and practice. There remains significant room for improvement in response rates, but ongoing tumor section efforts to increase member engagement will likely improve these numbers.

Investigating the real impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the daily neurosurgical practice?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to relate the neurosurgical activity during a time of sanitary crisis such as experienced during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective analysis was made based on a prospectively gathered cohort of all patients requiring neurosurgical care between March 15th and May 12th, 2020. Local impact of SARS-CoV-2 was analysed regarding number of patients admitted in ICU. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty patients could benefit from neurosurgical care with a wide-ranging profile of clinical and surgical activities performed during the study that seemed similar to last year profile activity. Surgical indications were restricted to non-deferrable surgeries, leading to a drop in operative volume of 50%. Only 1.3% of patients required transfer to other units due to the impossibility of providing gold standard neurosurgical care in our centre. CONCLUSION: Despite the challenges represented by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, it was proven possible to ensure the routine neurosurgical continuity and provide high standards of neurosurgical care without compromising patients' access to the required treatments.

The Surgical Autonomy Program: A Pilot Study of Social Learning Theory Applied to Competency-Based Neurosurgical Education.

Over the last decade, strict duty hour policies, pressure for increased work related value units from faculty, and the apprenticeship model of education have coalesced to make opportunities for intraoperative teaching more challenging. Evidence is emerging that graduating residents are not exhibiting competence by failing to recognize major complications, and perform routine operations independently. In this pilot study, we combine Vygotsky's social learning theory with a modified version of the competency-based scale called TAGS to study 1 single operation, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, with 3 individual residents taught by a single faculty member. In order for the 3 residents to achieve "Solo and Observe" in all 4 zones of proximal development, the number of cases required was 10 cases for postgraduate year (PGY)-3a, 19 cases for PGY 3b, and 22 cases for the PGY 2. In this pilot study, the time required to complete an independent 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion by the residents correlated with the number of cases to reach competence. We demonstrate the Surgical Autonomy Program's ability to track neurosurgical resident's educational progress and the feasibility of using the Surgical Autonomy Program (SAP) to teach residents in the operating room and provide immediate formative feedback. Ultimately, the SAP represents a paradigm shift towards a modern, scalable competency-focused subspecialty teaching, evaluation and assessment tool that provides increases in resident's autonomy and metacognitive skills, as well as immediate formative feedback.

Claims of Safety in Neurosurgical Literature: We Shouldn't Call Something Safe Without Strong Justification.

BACKGROUND: Many articles published in the neurosurgical literature make claims of safety regarding interventions. The strength of evidence supporting these claims has not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of evidence supporting claims of safety in the neurosurgery literature. METHODS: The 14 neurosurgical journals listed in the Web of Science database with the highest impact factors for 2018 were included in the study. The titles and abstracts of all the articles published in these journals in 2018 were searched for the word "safety" and reviewed by 2 independent observers to identify those making a claim of safety and assess their evidence. RESULTS: The search identified 323 articles, representing 5% of the articles published in the 14 searched journals in 2018. Of these, 114 (1.8% of all articles and 35% of the identified articles) were judged to make a claim of safety of a neurosurgical intervention. A total of 98 (86%) of the 114 articles making a safety claim were retrospective cohort studies. Patient cohort sizes ranged from 1 to 1565 (median of 34), leading to wide variations in the CIs for estimated complication rates. No article made a statement of the assumptions underlying its claim of safety. CONCLUSION: Almost no articles that make claims of safety for neurosurgical interventions explicitly state the (1) patient population, (2) comparison intervention, nor (3) specific outcomes. To assure that claims of safety are supported by high-quality evidence, authors should address these elements early and systematically when designing studies.

Setting standards of performance expected in neurosurgery residency: A study on entrustable professional activities in competency-based medical education.

BACKGROUND: Competency-based medical education requires evaluations of residents' performances of tasks of the discipline (ie. entrustable professional activities (EPAs)). Using neurosurgical Faculty perspectives, this study investigated whether a sample of neurosurgical EPAs accurately reflected the expectations of general neurosurgical practice. METHOD: A questionnaire was sent to all Canadian neurosurgery Faculty using a SurveyMonkey® platform. RESULTS: The proportion of respondents who believed the EPAs were representative of general neurosurgery competences varied significantly across all EPAs [47%-100%] (p < 0.0001). For 9/15 proposed EPAs, ≥75% agreed they were appropriate for general neurosurgery training and expected residents to attain the highest standard of performance. However, a range of 27-53% of the respondents felt the other six EPAs would be more appropriate for fellowship training and thus, require a lower standard of performance from graduating residents. CONCLUSION: The shift towards subspecialization in neurosurgery has implications for curriculum design, delivery and certification of graduating residents.

Natura non facit saltus: a phase 2 proposal to manage brain tumors cases from the Neuro-oncology section of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery (SINch®).

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has fast spread throughout the world in more than 200 countries, resulting in the need for a de-prioritization of elective medical care to face the demands of the global health crisis. Although the acute and catastrophic phase of the pandemic seems to have been left behind, it is also clear that the virus will not disappear soon, and we must live with it for a period of unpredictable length, the COVID-19 era. In this setting, a common coordinated approach to treat patients harboring brain tumors is urgently required to guarantee the best updated oncological care and to reduce the risk of viral infection during hospitalization. The study group on Neuro-oncology of Italian Society of Neurosurgery, SINCh gathered pieces of evidence and data and would like to suggest a practice protocol of care for neurosurgical oncologic procedures in the COVID-19 era. The present document aimed at summarizing current evidence and expert opinions to help neurosurgeons in taking decisions on their patients harboring different brain tumors.

An analysis of retractions in neurosurgery and allied clinical and basic science specialties.

BACKGROUND: As the volume of scientific publications increases, the rate of retraction of published papers is also likely to increase. In the present study, we report the characteristics of retracted papers from clinical neurosurgery and allied clinical and basic science specialties. METHODS: Retracted papers were identified using two separate search strategies on PubMed. Attributes of the retracted papers were collected from PubMed and the Retraction Watch database. The reasons for retraction were analyzed. The factors that correlated with time to retraction were identified. Detailed citation analysis for the retracted papers was performed. The retraction rates for neurosurgery journals were computed. RESULTS: A total of 191 retractions were identified; 55% pertained to clinical neurosurgery. The most common reasons for retraction were plagiarism, duplication, and compromised peer review. The countries associated with the highest number of retractions were China, USA, and Japan. The full text of the retraction notice was not available for 11% of the papers. A median of 50% of all citations received by the papers occurred after retraction. The factors that correlated with a longer time to retraction included basic science category, the number of collaborating departments, and the H-index of the journal. The overall rate of retractions in neurosurgery journals was 0.037%. CONCLUSIONS: The retraction notice needs to be freely available on all search engines. Plagiarism checks and reference checks prior to publication of papers (to ensure no retracted papers have been cited) must be mandatory. Mandatory data deposition would help overcome issues with data and results.

How accurate is the neurosurgery literature? A review of references.

BACKGROUND: The reference list is an important part of academic manuscripts. The goal of this study is to evaluate the reference accuracy in the field of neurosurgery. METHODS: This study examines four major peer-reviewed neurosurgery journals, chosen based on their clinical impact factor: Neurosurgery, J Neurosurg, World Neurosurg, and Acta Neurochir. For each of the four journals, five articles from each of the journal's 12 issues published in 2019 were randomly selected using an online generator. This resulted in a total of 240 articles, 60 from each journal. Additionally, from each article's list of references, one reference was again randomly selected and checked for a citation or quotation error. The chi-square test was used to analyze the association between the occurrence of citation and quotation errors and the presence of hypothesized risk factors that could impact reference accuracy. RESULTS: 62.1% of articles had a minor citation error, 8.33% had a major citation error, 12.1% had a minor quotation error, and 5.8% of articles had a major quotation error. Overall, Acta Neurochir presented with the fewest quotation errors compared with the other journals evaluated. The only association between the frequency of errors and potential markers of reference mistakes was with the length of the bibliography. Surprisingly, this correlation indicated that the articles with longer reference lists had fewer citation errors (p < 0.01). Statistical significance was found between the occurrence of citation errors and the journals of publication (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In order to advance medical treatment and patient care in neurosurgery, detailed documentation and attention to detail are necessary. The results from this analysis illustrate that improved reference accuracy is required.

Neuromodulation in headache and craniofacial neuralgia: guidelines from the Spanish Society of Neurology and the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery. / Neuromodulación en cefaleas y neuralgias craneofaciales: Guía de la Sociedad Española de Neurología y de la Sociedad Española de Neurocirugía.

INTRODUCTION: Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions. METHODS: Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia. RESULTS: We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.

Avoiding predatory publishing for early career neurosurgeons: what should you know before you submit?

BACKGROUND: Scientific research can offer the joy of discovery. For many graduating neurosurgeons, often, a seminar, class, or instructional module is their first and only formal exposure to the world of conducting research responsibly, to write down and report the results of such research. The pressure to publish scientific research is high, but any young neurosurgeon who is unaware of how predatory publishers operate can get duped by it and can lose their valuable and hard-fought research. Hence, we have attempted to provide an overview of all potentially predatory neurosurgery publications and provide some "red flags" to recognize them. METHODS: A suspected list of predatory publications was collected via a thorough review of the Neurosurgery journals listed in 4 major so-called blacklists, i.e., Beall's list, Manca's list, Cabell's blacklist, and Strinzel blacklist and then cross-referenced with UGC CARE whitelist to remove any potential legitimate journals. All journals with a scope of the Neurosurgery publication were searched using terms in the search bar: "Neurosurgery", "Neuroanatomy", "Neuropathology", and "Neurological disorder/disease". Since all predatory journals claim to be open access, all possible types of open access journals on Scimago were also searched, and thus a comparison was possible in terms of publication cost and number of legitimate open access journals when compared with predatory ones. In addition, methodologies by which these journals penetrate legitimate indexes like PubMed was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 46 predatory journals were found and were enlisted along with their publishers and web addresses. Sixty of the 360 Neurosurgery journals listed on Scimago were open access and the fee for the predatory journals was substantially lower (< $150) when compared with legitimate journals ($900-$3000). Six types of open access types exist while a total of 26 red flags in 7 stages of publication can be found in predatory journals. These journals have penetrated indexes by having similar names to legitimate journals and by publishing articles with external funding which mandate their indexing. CONCLUSION: These 46 journals were defined as predatory by 4 major blacklists, and none of them was found in the UGC Care white list. They also fulfill the 26 red-flags that define a predatory journal. The blacklist detailed here may become redundant; hence "whenever in doubt" regarding a journal with "red-flags", the authors are advised to refer to whitelists to be on the safer side. Publishing in predatory journals leads to not only loss of valuable research but also discredits a researcher among his peers and can be hindrance in career progression. Some journals are even indexed on PubMed, and they have sophisticated webpages and high-quality online presentations.

Guidelines for Preoperative Testing for Neurosurgery in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Era: Indian Viewpoint Amidst Global Practice.

Preoperative testing and evaluation for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been an enigmatic challenge for the neurosurgical community during the pandemic. Since the beginning of the pandemic, laboratory diagnostic methods have evolved substantially, and with them has been the necessity for readily available, fast, and accurate preoperative testing methods. In this article, we provide an overview of the various laboratory testing methods that are presently available and a comprehensive literature review how various institutes and neurosurgical communities across the globe are employing them to ensure safe and effective delivery of surgical care to patients. Through this review, we highlight the guiding principles for preoperative testing, which may serve as a road map for other medical institutions to follow. In addition, we provide an Indian perspective of preoperative testing and share our experience in this regard.

Battle-Tested Guidelines and Operational Protocols for Neurosurgical Practice in Times of a Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19.

The COVID-19 outbreak has led to fundamental disruptions of health care and its delivery with sweeping implications for patients and physicians of all specialties, including neurosurgery. In an effort to conserve hospital resources, neurosurgical procedures were classified into tiers to determine which procedures have to be performed in a timely fashion and which ones can be temporarily suspended to aid in the hospital's reallocation of resources when equipment is scarce. These guidelines were created quickly based on little existing evidence, and thus were initially variable and required refinement. As the early wave can now be assessed in retrospect, the authors describe the lessons learned and the protocols established based on published global evidence to continue to practice neurosurgery sensibly and minimize disruptions. These operational protocols can be applied in a surge of COVID-19 or another airborne pandemic.