This retrospective description of a surgical series is aimed at reporting on indications, methodology, results on seizures, outcome predictors and complications from a 20-year stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) activity performed at a single epilepsy surgery centre. Prospectively collected data from a consecutive series of 742 SEEG procedures carried out on 713 patients were reviewed and described. Long-term seizure outcome of SEEG-guided resections was defined as a binomial variable: absence (ILAE classes 1–2) or recurrence (ILAE classes 3–6) of disabling seizures. Predictors of seizure outcome were analysed by preliminary uni/bivariate analyses followed by multivariate logistic regression. Furthermore, results on seizures of these subjects were compared with those obtained in 1128 patients operated on after only non-invasive evaluation. Survival analyses were also carried out, limited to patients with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Resective surgery has been indicated for 570 patients (79.9%). Two-hundred and seventy-nine of 470 patients operated on (59.4%) were free of disabling seizures at least 2 years after resective surgery. Negative magnetic resonance and post-surgical lesion remnant were significant risk factors for seizure recurrence, while type II focal cortical dysplasia, balloon cells, glioneuronal tumours, hippocampal sclerosis, older age at epilepsy onset and periventricular nodular heterotopy were significantly associated with seizure freedom. Twenty-five of 153 patients who underwent radio-frequency thermal coagulation (16.3%) were optimal responders. Thirteen of 742 (1.8%) procedures were complicated by unexpected events, including three (0.4%) major complications and one fatality (0.1%). In conclusion, SEEG is a safe and efficient methodology for invasive definition of the epileptogenic zone in the most challenging patients. Despite the progressive increase of MRI-negative cases, the proportion of seizure-free patients did not decrease throughout the years.

OBJECTIVE: During the last 3 decades, robotic technology has rapidly spread across several surgical fields due to the continuous evolution of its versatility, stability, dexterity, and haptic properties. Neurosurgery pioneered the development of robotics, with the aim of improving the quality of several procedures requiring a high degree of accuracy and safety. Moreover, robot-guided approaches are of special interest in pediatric patients, who often have altered anatomy and challenging relationships between the diseased and eloquent structures. Nevertheless, the use of robots has been rarely reported in children. In this work, the authors describe their experience using the ROSA device (Robotized Stereotactic Assistant) in the neurosurgical management of a pediatric population. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2016, 116 children underwent ROSA-assisted procedures for a variety of diseases (epilepsy, brain tumors, intra- or extraventricular and tumor cysts, obstructive hydrocephalus, and movement and behavioral disorders). Each patient received accurate preoperative planning of optimal trajectories, intraoperative frameless registration, surgical treatment using specific instruments held by the robotic arm, and postoperative CT or MR imaging. RESULTS: The authors performed 128 consecutive surgeries, including implantation of 386 electrodes for stereo-electroencephalography (36 procedures), neuroendoscopy (42 procedures), stereotactic biopsy (26 procedures), pallidotomy (12 procedures), shunt placement (6 procedures), deep brain stimulation procedures (3 procedures), and stereotactic cyst aspiration (3 procedures). For each procedure, the authors analyzed and discussed accuracy, timing, and complications. CONCLUSIONS: To the best their knowledge, the authors present the largest reported series of pediatric neurosurgical cases assisted by robotic support. The ROSA system provided improved safety and feasibility of minimally invasive approaches, thus optimizing the surgical result, while minimizing postoperative morbidity.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of Neurolocate frameless registration system and frame-based registration for robotic stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG). METHODS: The authors performed a 40-trajectory phantom laboratory study and a 127-trajectory retrospective analysis of a surgical series. The laboratory study was aimed at testing the noninferiority of the Neurolocate system. The analysis of the surgical series compared Neurolocate-based SEEG implantations with a frame-based historical control group. RESULTS: The mean localization errors (LE) ± standard deviations (SD) for Neurolocate-based and frame-based trajectories were 0.67 ± 0.29 mm and 0.76 ± 0.34 mm, respectively, in the phantom study (p = 0.35). The median entry point LE was 0.59 mm (interquartile range [IQR] 0.25–0.88 mm) for Neurolocate-registration–based trajectories and 0.78 mm (IQR 0.49–1.08 mm) for frame-registration–based trajectories (p = 0.00002) in the clinical study. The median target point LE was 1.49 mm (IQR 1.06–2.4 mm) for Neurolocate-registration–based trajectories and 1.77 mm (IQR 1.25–2.5 mm) for frame-registration–based trajectories in the clinical study. All the surgical procedures were successful and uneventful. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the phantom study demonstrate the noninferiority of Neurolocate frameless registration. The results of the retrospective surgical series analysis suggest that Neurolocate-based procedures can be more accurate than the frame-based ones. The safety profile of Neurolocate-based registration should be similar to that of frame-based registration. The Neurolocate system is comfortable, noninvasive, easy to use, and potentially faster than other registration devices.