Background: While several publications have focused on the intuitive role of augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) in neurosurgical planning, the aim of this review was to explore other avenues, where these technologies have significant utility and applicability. Methods: This review was conducted by searching PubMed, PubMed Central, Google Scholar, the Scopus database, the Web of Science Core Collection database, and the SciELO citation index, from 1989–2021. An example of a search strategy used in PubMed Central is: “Virtual reality” [All Fields] AND (“neurosurgical procedures” [MeSH Terms] OR (“neurosurgical” [All Fields] AND “procedures” [All Fields]) OR “neurosurgical procedures” [All Fields] OR “neurosurgery” [All Fields] OR “neurosurgery” [MeSH Terms]). Using this search strategy, we identified 487 (PubMed), 1097 (PubMed Central), and 275 citations (Web of Science Core Collection database). Results: Articles were found and reviewed showing numerous applications of VR/AR in neurosurgery. These applications included their utility as a supplement and augment for neuronavigation in the fields of diagnosis for complex vascular interventions, spine deformity correction, resident training, procedural practice, pain management, and rehabilitation of neurosurgical patients. These technologies have also shown promise in other area of neurosurgery, such as consent taking, training of ancillary personnel, and improving patient comfort during procedures, as well as a tool for training neurosurgeons in other advancements in the field, such as robotic neurosurgery. Conclusions: We present the first review of the immense possibilities of VR in neurosurgery, beyond merely planning for surgical procedures. The importance of VR and AR, especially in “social distancing” in neurosurgery training, for economically disadvantaged sections, for prevention of medicolegal claims and in pain management and rehabilitation, is promising and warrants further research.

Background: Exoscopes are a safe and effective alternative or adjunct to the existing binocular surgical microscope for brain tumor, skull base surgery, aneurysm clipping and both cervical and lumbar complex spine surgery that probably will open a new era in the field of new tools and techniques in neurosurgery. Methods: A Pubmed and Ovid EMBASE search was performed to identify papers that include surgical experiences with the exoscope in neurosurgery. PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) were followed. Results: A total of 86 articles and 1711 cases were included and analyzed in this review. Among 86 papers included in this review 74 (86%) were published in the last 5 years. Out of 1711 surgical procedures, 1534 (89.6%) were performed in the operative room, whereas 177 (10.9%) were performed in the laboratory on cadavers. In more detail, 1251 (72.7%) were reported as brain surgeries, whereas 274 (16%) and 9 (0.5%) were reported as spine and peripheral nerve surgeries, respectively. Considering only the clinical series (40 studies and 1328 patients), the overall surgical complication rate was 2.6% during the use of the exoscope. These patients experienced complication profiles similar to those that underwent the same treatments with the OM. The overall switch incidence rate from exoscope to OM during surgery was 5.8%. Conclusions: The exoscope seems to be a safe alternative compared to an operative microscope for the most common brain and spinal procedures, with several advantages that have been reached, such as an easier simplicity of use and a better 3D vision and magnification of the surgical field. Moreover, it offers the opportunity of better interaction with other members of the surgical staff. All these points set the first step for subsequent and short-term changes in the field of neurosurgery and offer new educational possibilities for young neurosurgery and medical students.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumour in adults. Despite the combination of novel therapeutical approaches, it remains a deadly malignancy with an abysmal prognosis. GBM is a polymorphic tumour from both molecular and histological points of view. It consists of different malignant cells and various stromal cells, contributing to tumour initiation, progression, and treatment response. GBM’s microenvironment is multifaceted and is made up of soluble factors, extracellular matrix components, tissue-resident cell types (e.g., neurons, astrocytes, endothelial cells, pericytes, and fibroblasts) together with resident (e.g., microglia) or recruited (e.g., bone marrow-derived macrophages) immune cells. These latter constitute the so-called immune microenvironment, accounting for a substantial GBM’s tumour volume. Despite the abundance of immune cells, an intense state of tumour immunosuppression is promoted and developed; this represents the significant challenge for cancer cells’ immune-mediated destruction. Though literature data suggest that distinct GBM’s subtypes harbour differences in their microenvironment, its role in treatment response remains obscure. However, an in-depth investigation of GBM’s microenvironment may lead to novel therapeutic opportunities to improve patients’ outcomes. This review will elucidate the GBM’s microenvironment composition, highlighting the current state of the art in immunotherapy approaches. We will focus on novel strategies of active and passive immunotherapies, including vaccination, gene therapy, checkpoint blockade, and adoptive T-cell therapies.

In this study, we investigated whether treatment with palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin (PEA-LUT) leads to improvement in the quantitative or qualitative measures of olfactory dysfunction or relief from mental clouding in patients affected by long COVID. Patients with long COVID olfactory dysfunction were allocated to different groups based on the presence (“previously treated”) or absence (“naïve”) of prior exposure to olfactory training. Patients were then randomized to receive PEA-LUT alone or in combination with olfactory training. Olfactory function and memory were assessed at monthly intervals using self-report measures and quantitative thresholds. A total of 69 patients (43 women, 26 men) with an age average of 40.6 + 10.5 were recruited. PEA-LUT therapy was associated with a significant improvement in validated odor identification scores at the baseline versus each subsequent month; assessment at 3 months showed an average improvement of 10.7 + 2.6, CI 95%: 6–14 (p < 0.0001). The overall prevalence of parosmia was 79.7% (55 patients), with a significant improvement from the baseline to 3 months (p < 0.0001), namely in 31 patients from the Naïve 1 group (72%), 15 from the Naïve 2 group (93.7%), and 9 from the remaining group (90%). Overall, mental clouding was detected in 37.7% (26 subjects) of the cases, with a reduction in severity from the baseline to three months (p = 0.02), namely in 15 patients from the Naïve 1 group (34.8%), 7 from the Naïve 2 group (43.7%), and 4 from the remaining group (40%). Conclusions. In patients with long COVID and chronic olfactory loss, a regimen including oral PEA-LUT and olfactory training ameliorated olfactory dysfunction and memory. Further investigations are necessary to discern biomarkers, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes.