Citations

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.

Objectives: To summarize the current evidence for radiation therapy (RT) in the prevention and treatment of heterotopic ossification (HO), including patient selection, optimal RT technique, and associated risks. Methods: This multispecialty-led committee includes radiation oncologists, rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and physical medicine/rehabilitation physicians. Using the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing and study design (PICOTS) framework, evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA methodology. Eligible studies included prospective and retrospective studies published between January 1, 1980, and November 1, 2025, from Embase, Medline, and PubMed databases. Of the 197 articles identified using the search strategy, 83 were selected for inclusion as evidence, including 27 well-designed studies (phase II randomized and phase III), 16 moderately well-designed studies that account for most common biases (matched cohort and phase II studies), 31 studies with design limitations (retrospective reviews), 2 supplemental studies (not useful as primary evidence), and 7 meta-analyses. Additional studies were included to provide context and were not used to guide recommendations. Well-established RAND-UCLA consensus methodology (modified Delphi) was used to rate the appropriateness of the treatment options. Results: The results of this analysis demonstrate that in appropriately selected patients, RT is an effective and safe therapy for prophylaxis of HO formation. Conclusions: This systematic review provides consensus guidelines for the use of RT as prophylaxis of HO based on current peer-reviewed evidence in the literature.

Objectives: To summarize current evidence for radiotherapy in the treatment of OA. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome questions included: What is the role of LDRT for treatment of OA?; What are risks of LDRT?; and What are the optimal RT techniques for OA? Methods: This multispecialty-led committee includes radiation oncologists, rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and a patient advocate. Using the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing and study design (PICOTS) framework, evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA methodology. Eligible studies included prospective and retrospective (n≥50) studies published between January 1, 2010, and May 10, 2025, from Embase, Medline, and PubMed databases. Study type and quality were assessed. Well-established RAND-UCLA consensus methodology (modified Delphi) was used to rate the appropriateness of the treatment options. Results: Of the 548 articles identified using the search strategy, 44 were selected for inclusion. Eight additional studies were identified through backward citation searching. Ten well-designed studies accounting for biases, 15 moderately well-designed studies accounting for the most common biases, 18 studies with design limitations, 8 supplemental studies not useful as primary evidence, and 1 meta-analysis were included. Additional studies were included to provide context and were not used to guide recommendations. The results of this analysis demonstrate that LDRT results in an overall treatment response rate of 60% to 90%, with significant clinical benefits including pain reduction, increased joint mobility, and improved quality of life. Conclusions: This systematic review and consensus guidelines for LDRT treatment of OA are based on current evidence. Further high-quality studies are warranted.

Diagnosing rare genetic diseases remains a major challenge despite widespread clinical testing. Long-read RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) offers a powerful approach to capturing the effects of genetic variants on the transcriptome, yet challenges with sequencing coverage, cost, tissue selection, and scalability have limited its clinical adoption. To address this, we developed STRIPE (Sequencing Targeted RNAs Identifies Pathogenic Events), a targeted long-read RNA-seq–based strategy for rare disease diagnosis and variant interpretation. STRIPE enables deep sequencing of full-length transcripts for any customized disease-specific gene panel such that a wide range of clinically informative readouts, including transcript aberrations and sequence variants, can be detected at haplotype-level resolution. Applying STRIPE to 88 individuals spanning two major rare disease groups, we accurately reidentified known pathogenic variants and revealed their transcript consequences, including many unexpected ones. For 8 of 15 splice site region variants, we observed more complex RNA processing defects beyond single exon skipping or cryptic splice site activation. Notably, we find that donor splice site variants frequently activate cryptic intronic polyadenylation sites, leading to premature transcript termination. Leveraging unique strengths of long-read RNA-seq, STRIPE also resolved variants of uncertain significance and uncovered disease-causing variants in five previously undiagnosed individuals. Overall, STRIPE is a powerful, adaptable, and scalable strategy with broad potential to improve clinical variant interpretation and advance genetic diagnosis of rare diseases.

ABSTRACT Objectives While maxillary sinus fungal balls (MSFB) can be associated with odontogenic conditions (MSFBO), MSFBO clinical and dental features have not been compared to odontogenic sinusitis (ODS). This multicenter study aimed to compare characteristics of MSFB, MSFBO, and ODS. Methods A multicenter international retrospective cohort study was conducted on adults with MSFBs and ODS who underwent sinus surgery. First in MSFBs, it was determined whether different dental conditions were more likely in FB versus non‐FB sides. Second, clinical features and dental pathologies were compared between MSFBO and ODS. For analyses, dental conditions were considered individually and as two groups: infectious pathologies and dental/oral procedures with indwelling metallic materials. Results After exclusions, there were 203 MSFBs and 163 ODS. Among MSFBs, 141 were MSFBOs. FB sides were associated with sinus protrusion of root canal treatment (RCT) materials ( p = 0.040) and dental implants ( p = 0.040). Compared to MSFBO, ODS patients were younger, more likely to have MS purulence (OR = 40.9, p < 0.010), more likely associated with apical periodontitis (OR = 2.59, p = 0.010) and oroantral fistulas (OR = 6.94, p = 0.020), and less likely associated with extruded RCT materials (OR = 0.01, p = 0.010) and protruded midface screws (OR < 0.01, p = 0.010). Comparing purulent MSFBO and ODS, ODS was more associated with infectious dental pathologies ( p < 0.009). Conclusion Compared to MSFBs, MSFBOs were associated with RCT extrusion and implant protrusion. Compared to MSFBOs, ODS was more likely purulent and associated with infectious dental pathologies. While ODS is often distinct from MSFBO, the two conditions can coexist, and surgeons must determine whether patients have infectious dental pathology requiring treatment with both conditions. Level of Evidence 4.

ABSTRACT Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) can reduce seizures in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. However, seizure freedom is rare, and there is no early response biomarker to predict long-term seizure suppression. To evaluate a short-term biomarker of therapeutic response to DBS, we studied 18-minute trials of ANT stimulation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy undergoing intracranial electroencephalography. We compared a standard high-frequency periodic versus a non-periodic pulse pattern. We found that short-term ANT stimulation within the clinically used amplitude range preferentially altered the first 150 ms of anterograde ANT to anterior cingulate and superior frontal connectivity. Non-periodic ANT stimulation selectively modified early cortico-cortical evoked potentials more than periodic stimulation, and these changes were driven by the response phase. These pattern-specific changes in connectivity between the ANT and spatially restricted cortical areas suggest differing mechanisms and are a promising biomarker for patients being treated with ANT-DBS.

OBJECTIVE Brain metastases significantly impact neurocognitive function and overall survival. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a cornerstone of treatment for patients with limited metastases and expected survival beyond 3 months. Despite current guidelines, up to 20% of patients with brain metastases undergoing SRS have been reported to die within 90 days. This study retrospectively evaluated prognostic factors associated with 90-day survival after SRS, aiming to improve patient selection. METHODS The authors retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 1546 patients who underwent Gamma Knife SRS for brain metastases at their institution between 2015 and 2023. One hundred seventy patients who survived less than 90 days after SRS were identified and case matched to 170 patients who survived over 90 days. Measured variables included patient demographic characteristics, tumor characteristics, treatment history, functional status, and control of the primary cancer. The authors modeled post-SRS 90-day survival using binomial and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS Multivariate analysis highlighted Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) < 70 (OR 17.4, p < 0.001), prior whole-brain radiation (OR 6, p = 0.004), and focal neurological deficits (OR 3.02, p = 0.003) as significant predictors of poor survival, whereas CNS progression before SRS (OR 0.22, p < 0.001) and control of systemic cancer (OR 0.556, p = 0.002) were associated with survival < 90 days. The predictive model demonstrated acceptable performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85, accuracy of 80%, sensitivity of 87%, and specificity of 71%. CONCLUSIONS Key predictors of 90-day survival after SRS for brain metastases include functional status (KPS), control of systemic cancer, CNS progression status, and focal neurological deficits. These findings are complementary factors that can assist in making decisions and SRS patient selection.