Ultrasonic aspiration in neurosurgery: comparative analysis of complications and outcome for three commonly used models.

INTRODUCTION: Ultrasonic aspiration (UA) devices are commonly used for resecting intracranial tumors, as they allow for internal debulking of large tumors, hereby avoiding damage to adjacent brain tissue during the dissection. Little is known about their comparative safety profiles. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed data from a prospective patient registry. Procedures using one of the following UA models were included: Integra® CUSA, Söring®, and Stryker® Sonopet. The primary endpoint was morbidity at discharge, defined as significant worsening on the Karnofsky Performance Scale. Secondary endpoints included morbidity and mortality until 3 months postoperative (M3), occurrence, type, and etiology of complications. RESULTS: Of n = 1028 procedures, the CUSA was used in n = 354 (34.4 %), the Söring in n = 461 (44.8 %), and the Sonopet in n = 213 (20.7 %). There was some heterogeneity of study groups. In multivariable analysis, patients in the Söring (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.29; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.80-2.08; p = 0.299), and Sonopet group (aOR, 0.86; 95 % CI, 0.46-1.61; p = 0.645) were as likely as patients in the CUSA group to experience discharge morbidity. At M3, patients in the Söring (aOR, 1.20; 95 % CI, 0.78-1.86; p = 0.415) and Sonopet group (aOR, 0.53; 95 % CI, 0.26-1.08; p = 0.080) were as likely as patients in the CUSA group to experience morbidity. There were also no differences for M3 morbidity in subgroup analyses for gliomas, meningiomas, and metastases. The grade (p = 0.608) and etiology (p = 0.849) of postoperative complications were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Neurosurgeons select UA types with regard to certain case-specific characteristics. The safety profiles of three commonly used UA types appear mostly similar.

Safety of resident training in the microsurgical resection of intracranial tumors: Data from a prospective registry of complications and outcome.

The aim of the present study was to assess the safety of microsurgical resection of intracranial tumors performed by supervised neurosurgical residents. We analyzed prospectively collected data from our institutional patient registry and dichotomized between procedures performed by supervised neurosurgery residents (defined as teaching procedures) or board-certified faculty neurosurgeons (defined as non-teaching procedures). The primary endpoint was morbidity at discharge, defined as a postoperative decrease of ≥10 points on the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). Secondary endpoints included 3-month (M3) morbidity, mortality, the in-hospital complication rate, and complication type and severity. Of 1,446 consecutive procedures, 221 (15.3%) were teaching procedures. Patients in the teaching group were as likely as patients in the non-teaching group to experience discharge morbidity in both uni- (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.60-1.22, p = 0.391) and multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 1.08, 95%CI 0.74-1.58, p = 0.680). The results were consistent at time of the M3 follow-up and in subgroup analyses. In-hospital mortality was equally low (0.24 vs. 0%, p = 0.461) and the likelihood (p = 0.499), type (p = 0.581) and severity of complications (p = 0.373) were similar. These results suggest that microsurgical resection of carefully selected intracranial tumors can be performed safely by supervised neurosurgical residents without increasing the risk of morbidity, mortality or perioperative complications. Appropriate allocation of operations according to case complexity and the resident's experience level, however, appears essential.