Michaelcheck, Charlotte E.

OBJECTIVE Maximal safe resection of intra-axial brain tumors near the motor cortex is aided by intraoperative motor mapping. Here, the authors compared outcomes in patients undergoing either low-frequency bipolar stimulation (LFBS) or high-frequency monopolar stimulation (HFMS) for cortical and/or subcortical motor mapping during brain tumor resection. METHODS A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing an asleep craniotomy with motor mapping or an awake craniotomy with motor and speech mapping with a single surgeon was performed. Three cohorts were compared: 1) asleep LFBS (AsLFBS), 2) awake LFBS (AwLFBS; motor + speech mapping), and 3) asleep HFMS. HFMS mapping was not used for awake craniotomies. RESULTS A total of 284 patients who underwent 300 craniotomies with motor mapping were identified. No significant differences in permanent neurological deficits (p = 0.377) or extent of resection (EOR) of nonenhancing tumors (p = 0.453) were identified between LFBS or HFMS motor mapping cases. Both EOR (92.7% vs 83.5%, p = 0.035) and permanent neurological deficits (7.6% vs 3.3%) occurred more frequently in enhancing tumors with LFBS, although the latter was not statistically significant. HFMS was associated with higher rates of subcortical motor pathway identification (p = 0.001) and fewer total intraoperative seizures (p = 0.003) compared with LFBS. Previous resection (HR 0.46, p = 0.003) and a higher cortical threshold (HR 0.95, p = 0.023) were significantly associated with longer survival, while preoperative aphasia (HR 2.24, p = 0.022), hospital length of stay (HR 1.1, p = 0.005), an insular-based tumor (HR 3.5, p = 0.021), and a histological diagnosis of glioblastoma (HR 2.9, p = 0.001) were negative predictors. Interestingly, overall FLAIR EOR was significantly associated with a marginally decreased overall survival (HR 1.01, p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS No significant differences in postoperative neurological deficits were found between LFBS and HFMS paradigms. HFMS may identify subcortical motor fibers more reliably while resulting in significantly fewer intraoperative seizures. Although LFBS was associated with greater EOR of contrast-enhancing tumors, it may also be associated with higher rates of postoperative deficits, perhaps reflecting less reliable identification of subcortical motor fibers.

Abstract Professor Albert J. Rhoton Jr., MD, is renowned for his groundbreaking dissections, marking a monumental achievement in the field of neuroanatomy. Alongside his anatomical contributions, he also passed on his knowledge and skills to numerous fellows, leaving behind a profound legacy. Despite the widespread recognition of his influence, little quantitative work has been done to characterize the scholarly impact of his alumni. Data were collected on Rhoton fellows, including fellowship years, country of origin, current institutions, and titles, practice settings, and leadership roles. Scholarly productivity was evaluated by assessing publication counts, including publications before and after the fellowship, and publications focused on surgical anatomy. Additionally, H-indices and citation counts were recorded. Other variables analyzed included ownership of a surgical anatomy laboratory, and participation in organizing hands-on courses. We analyzed 118 alumni from diverse countries. There was a significant increase in publication output following the fellowship, with publications rising from an average of 7 to 76 (p < 0.001). Fellows from high-income countries had higher research productivity than those from middle-income countries, with greater average H-index (p = 0.003), publication count (p = 0.01), and citation score (p = 0.003). Overall, 65% of fellows pursued academic practice, with 18% owning a laboratory and 30% involved in hands-on courses. Dr. Rhoton's mentorship has shaped a generation of neurosurgeons who continue his legacy. His fellows have established careers worldwide, leading in academia, professional organizations, and surgical training. Their global impact underscores the lasting value of structured mentorship in neurosurgery.

OBJECTIVE Calcium phosphate cement (CPC) use has been previously described as a strategy to reduce the rates of pseudomeningocele and CSF leakage following skull base surgery. The authors aimed to present their institutional experience with CPC in retrosigmoid craniotomy and perform a systematic review of the literature to determine the effectiveness of CPC in reducing postoperative complications, including pseudomeningocele and craniotomy-site CSF leakage. METHODS A retrospective single-institution cohort study of patients who underwent retrosigmoid craniotomy with and without CPC cranioplasty from January 2017 to April 2024 was performed. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of CPC use in retrosigmoid craniotomy was also performed. RESULTS Of 336 patients who underwent retrosigmoid craniotomy, 193 (57%) were female and the median age at surgery was 55 years (range 18–81 years). The median follow-up duration was 23 months (range 3–80 months). CPC was used to seal the edge of the craniotomy in 66 patients (20%). Among all patients, 50 (15%) experienced a postoperative complication, and 28 (8%) were wound-specific complications. Patients in the non-CPC group experienced significantly more postoperative wound-specific complications than those in the CPC group (10% vs 0%, p = 0.002). Specifically, pseudomeningocele occurred in 0 patients (0%) in the CPC group compared with 24 patients (9%) in the non-CPC group (p = 0.006), which progressed to CSF leaks at the craniotomy site in 6 patients (p = 0.60). Additionally, no patients (0%) in the CPC group experienced wound infection, dehiscence, or breakdown compared with 10 patients (4%) in the non-CPC group (p = 0.22). Five patients (8%) in the CPC group reported prolonged mild incisional pain at the craniotomy site, and there were no instances of major complications related to the CPC. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria, yielding a total of 2166 patients (including the current study), 1101 of whom received CPC. In the pooled analysis, CPC was significantly associated with lower risk of CSF leakage at the craniotomy site (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.13–0.42; p < 0.01) and lower risk of infection (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.08–0.38; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS CPC use in retrosigmoid craniotomies could be a safe and effective strategy to reduce the incidence of pseudomeningocele and craniotomy-site CSF leakage, leading to lower rates of wound-related complications and infection.