Background: Orbital metastases often lead to severe functional impairment. The role of resection, orbital exenteration, and complementary treatments is still debated. We systematically reviewed the literature on orbital metastases. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web-of-Science, and Cochrane were searched upon PRISMA guidelines to identify studies on orbital metastases. Clinical characteristics, management strategies, and survival were analyzed. Results: We included 262 studies comprising 873 patients. Median age was 59 years. The most frequent primary tumors were breast (36.3%), melanoma (10.1%), and prostate (8.5%) cancers, with median time interval of 12 months (range, 0–420). The most common symptoms were proptosis (52.3%) and relative-afferent-pupillary-defect (38.7%). Most metastases showed a diffuse location within the orbit (19%), with preferential infiltration of orbital soft tissues (40.2%). In 47 cases (5.4%), tumors extended intracranially. Incisional biopsy (63.7%) was preferred over fine-needle aspiration (10.2%), with partial resection (16.6%) preferred over complete (9.5%). Orbital exenteration was pursued in 26 patients (3%). A total of 305 patients (39.4%) received chemotherapy, and 506 (58%) received orbital radiotherapy. Post-treatment symptom improvement was significantly superior after resection (p = 0.005) and orbital radiotherapy (p = 0.032). Mean follow-up was 14.3 months, and median overall survival was 6 months. Fifteen cases (1.7%) demonstrated recurrence with median local control of six months. Overall survival was statistically increased in patients with breast cancer (p < 0.001) and in patients undergoing resection (p = 0.024) but was not correlated with orbital location (p = 0.174), intracranial extension (p = 0.073), biopsy approach (p = 0.344), extent-of-resection (p = 0.429), or orbital exenteration (p = 0.153). Conclusions: Orbital metastases severely impair patient quality of life. Surgical resection safely provides symptom and survival benefit compared to biopsy, while orbital radiotherapy significantly improves symptoms compared to not receiving radiotherapy.

Intracranial aneurysms represent a major global health burden. Rupture of an intracranial aneurysm is a catastrophic event. Without access to treatment, the fatality rate is 50% in the first 30 days. Over the last three decades, treatment approaches for intracranial aneurysms have changed dramatically. There have been improvements in the medical management of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, and there has been an evolution of treatment strategies. Endovascular therapy is now the mainstay of the treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms based on robust randomised controlled trial data. There is now an expansion of treatment indications for unruptured intracranial aneurysms to prevent rupture with both microsurgical clipping and endovascular treatment. Both microsurgical and endovascular treatment modalities have evolved, in particular with the introduction of innovative endovascular treatment options including flow diversion and intra-saccular flow disruption. These novel therapies allow clinicians to treat more complex and previously untreatable aneurysms. We aim to review the evolution of treatment strategies for intracranial aneurysms over time, and discuss emerging technologies that could further improve treatment safety and functional outcomes for patients with an intracranial aneurysm.

Background: Primary skull base chondrosarcomas (SBCs) can severely affect patients’ quality of life. Surgical-resection and radiotherapy are feasible but may cause debilitating complications. We systematically reviewed the literature on primary SBCs. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web-of-Science, and Cochrane were searched following the PRISMA guidelines to include studies of patients with primary SBCs. Clinical characteristics, management strategies, and treatment outcomes were analyzed. Results: We included 33 studies comprising 1307 patients. Primary SBCs mostly involved the middle-fossa (72.7%), infiltrating the cavernous-sinus in 42.4% of patients. Cranial-neuropathies were reported in 810 patients (62%). Surgical-resection (93.3%) was preferred over biopsy (6.6%). The most frequent open surgical approaches were frontotemporal-orbitozygomatic (17.6%) and pterional (11.9%), and 111 patients (21.3%) underwent endoscopic-endonasal resection. Post-surgical cerebrospinal-fluid leaks occurred in 36 patients (6.5%). Radiotherapy was delivered in 1018 patients (77.9%): photon-based (41.4%), proton-based (64.2%), and carbon-based (13.1%). Severe post-radiotherapy complications, mostly hypopituitarism (15.4%) and hearing loss (7.1%) were experienced by 251 patients (30.7%). Post-treatment symptom-improvement (46.7%) and reduced/stable tumor volumes (85.4%) showed no differences based on radiotherapy-protocols (p = 0.165; p = 0.062). Median follow-up was 67-months (range, 0.1–376). SBCs recurrences were reported in 211 cases (16.1%). The 5-year and 10-year progression-free survival rates were 84.3% and 67.4%, and overall survival rates were 94% and 84%. Conclusion: Surgical-resection and radiotherapy are effective treatments in primary SBCs, with acceptable complication rates and favorable local tumor control.

Transcranial MR-guided Focused ultrasound (tcMRgFUS) is a surgical procedure that adopts focused ultrasounds beam towards a specific therapeutic target through the intact skull. The convergence of focused ultrasound beams onto the target produces tissue effects through released energy. Regarding neurosurgical applications, tcMRgFUS has been successfully adopted as a non-invasive procedure for ablative purposes such as thalamotomy, pallidotomy, and subthalamotomy for movement disorders. Several studies confirmed the effectiveness of tcMRgFUS in the treatment of several neurological conditions, ranging from motor disorders to psychiatric disorders. Moreover, using low-frequencies tcMRgFUS systems temporarily disrupts the blood–brain barrier, making this procedure suitable in neuro-oncology and neurodegenerative disease for controlled drug delivery. Nowadays, tcMRgFUS represents one of the most promising and fascinating technologies in neuroscience. Since it is an emerging technology, tcMRgFUS is still the subject of countless disparate studies, even if its effectiveness has been already proven in many experimental and therapeutic fields. Therefore, although many studies have been carried out, many others are still needed to increase the degree of knowledge of the innumerable potentials of tcMRgFUS and thus expand the future fields of application of this technology.

The use of social media to communicate and disseminate knowledge has increased exponentially, especially in the field of neurosurgery. ‘Neurosurgery cocktail’ (NC) was developed by a group of young...

Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is categorized as a grade IV astrocytoma by the World Health Organization (WHO), representing the most aggressive and prevalent form of glioma. It presents a significant clinical challenge, with limited treatment options and poor prognosis. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of various nanotherapy approaches for GBM and explores future directions in tumor management. Nanomedicine, which involves nanoparticles in the 1–100 nm range, shows promise in improving drug delivery and targeting tumor cells. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of databases including Google Scholar, NCBI PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted to identify clinical trials on GBM and nanomedicine. The primary outcome measures were median overall survival, progression-free survival, and quality of life assessed through Karnofsky performance scores. The safety profile was assessed by adverse events. Results: The analysis included 225 GBM patients, divided into primary and recurrent sub-populations. Primary GBM patients had a median overall survival of 6.75 months, while recurrent GBM patients had a median overall survival of 9.7 months. The mean PFS period was 2.3 months and 3.92 months in primary GBM and recurrent GBM patients, respectively. Nanotherapy showed an improvement in quality of life, with KPS scores increasing after treatment in recurrent GBM patients. Adverse events were observed in 14.2% of patients. Notably, Bevacizumab therapy exhibited better survival outcomes but with a higher incidence of adverse events. Conclusions: Nanotherapy offers a modest increase in survival with fewer severe side effects. It shows promise in improving the quality of life, especially in recurrent GBM patients. However, it falls short in terms of overall survival compared to Bevacizumab. The heterogeneous nature of treatment protocols and reporting methods highlights the need for standardized multicenter trials to further evaluate the potential of nanomedicine in GBM management.