Comparison of frame-less robotic versus frame-based stereotactic biopsy of intracranial lesions.

OBJECTIVE: Robotic guidance might be an alternative to classic stereotaxy for biopsies of intracranial lesions. Both methods were compared regarding time efficacy, histopathological results and complications.

METHODS: A retrospective analysis enrolling all patients undergoing robotic- or stereotactic biopsies between 01/2015 and 12/2018 was conducted. Trajectory planning was performed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). With the Robotic Surgery Assistant (ROSA), patient registration was accomplished using a facial laser scan in the operating room (OR), immediately followed by biopsy. In stereotaxy, patients were transported to the CT for Leksell Frame registration, followed by biopsy in the OR.

RESULTS: The average overall procedure time amounted in robotics to 169 min and in stereotaxy to 179 min (p = 0.005). The difference was greatest for temporal targets, amounting in robotics to 161 min and in stereotaxy to 188 min (p = 0,0007). However, the average time spent purely in the OR amounted in robotics to 140 min and in stereotaxy to 113 min (p < 0.001). In 150 robotic biopsies, diagnostic yield amounted to 98%, in 266 stereotactic biopsies to 91%. Symptomatic postoperative hemorrhages were observed in 3 patients (2%) in robotic biopsy and 7 patients (2,7%) in stereotactic biopsy.

CONCLUSION: Robotics showed a shorter overall procedure time as there is no need for a transport to the CT whereas the pure OR time was shorter in stereotaxy due to skipping the laser registration process. Diagnostic yield was higher in robotics, most likely due to case selection, complication rates were equal.