Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2697-3953
A New Technique for Stereotactically Guided Burr Hole Trephination Simplifies the Workflow of Stereotactic Surgery
Authors
Abstract
Background
Stereotactic procedures usually require burr hole trephination. To date, there is no Conformité Européenne-certified drilling system that can be integrated into a stereotactic apparatus, thus enabling stereotactically guided trephinations (SGTs). Therefore, free-hand burr hole trephination is the standard of care, often requiring time-consuming burr hole widening.
Materials and Methods
We developed a novel drill, which can be picked up through a standard cordless drill and a novel guide sleeve (Instrument guide inner diameter: 10 mm for Riechert–Mundinger [RM] rail holder for microprobe insertion), which can be easily integrated into a stereotactic RM-system. This device enables stereotactic guidance of the drill. Over a period of 8 months, we recorded the trephination in all patients who underwent stereotactic-guided biopsy or catheter insertion in our department. In the first 4 months, a freehand trephination (FHT) using a standard trepan was performed; in the second half of the period, the novel SGT was performed. An unpaired t-test and chi-square test were used to compare SGT with FHT in terms of time for trephination, time from trephination to dura incision, and whether additional surgical measurements (osteoclastic enlargement, hemostasis) were necessary.
Results
Overall, 84 trephinations (SGT: n = 27, FHT = 57) for stereotactic biopsies were included. The mean time for completing the burr hole showed no difference between the groups (SGT: 64 s, FHT: 55 s, p = 0.485). The mean time until dura incision was significantly (p = 0.018) reduced when using SGT (FHT: 304 ± 170 s vs. SGT: 136 ± 89 s). Additional osteoclastic expansion was frequently necessary in the FHT group (81% [n = 46] vs. 3.7% [n = 1], p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for hemostasis, which was significantly less necessary in the SGT group (71% [n = 41] vs. 40% [n = 11], p = 0.006). We did not observe any difference between board-certified neurosurgeons and trainees for all these parameters.
Conclusions
SGT significantly shortens the time until dura opening compared to FHT. Additionally, time-consuming hemostasis and osteoclastic entlargements are no longer necessary when using SGT. Furthermore, SGT seems to be successfully applied regardless of the surgeon's level of training.
Publication History
Received: 15 January 2025
Accepted: 05 September 2025
Article published online:
18 November 2025
© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Gleason CA, Wise BL, Feinstein B. Stereotactic localization (with computerized tomographic scanning), biopsy, and radiofrequency treatment of deep brain lesions. Neurosurgery 1978; 2 (03) 217-222
- 2 Hamisch C, Blau T, Klinger K. et al. Feasibility, risk profile and diagnostic yield of stereotactic biopsy in children and young adults with brain lesions. Klin Padiatr 2017; 229 (03) 133-141
- 3 Hamisch CA, Minartz J, Blau T. et al. Frame-based stereotactic biopsy of deep-seated and midline structures in 511 procedures: feasibility, risk profile, and diagnostic yield. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161 (10) 2065-2071
- 4 Kellermann SG, Hamisch CA, Rueß D. et al. Stereotactic biopsy in elderly patients: risk assessment and impact on treatment decision. J Neurooncol 2017; 134 (02) 303-307
- 5 Ostertag CB, Mennel HD, Kiessling M. Stereotactic biopsy of brain tumors. Surg Neurol 1980; 14 (04) 275-283
- 6 Takahashi H, Sugai T, Uzuka T. et al. Complications and diagnostic yield of stereotactic biopsy for the patients with malignant brain tumors [In Japanese]. No Shinkei Geka 2004; 32 (02) 135-140
- 7 Riechert T, Mundinger F. Description and use of an aiming device for stereotactic brain surgery (II. model) (Beschreibung und Anwendung eines Zielgerates fur stereotaktische Hirnoperationen (II. Modell)). Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien) 1955; 3: 308-337
- 8 Dyck P, Bouzaglou A, Gruskin P. Stereotactic biopsy and brachytherapy of brain tumours. Neurol Res 1987; 9 (02) 69-90
- 9 Sturm V, Pastyr O, Schlegel W. et al. Stereotactic computer tomography with a modified Riechert-Mundinger device as the basis for integrated stereotactic neuroradiological investigations. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1983; 68 (1-2): 11-17
- 10 Minchev G, Kronreif G, Ptacek W. et al. A novel robot-guided minimally invasive technique for brain tumor biopsies. J Neurosurg 2019; 132 (01) 150-158
- 11 Toyoda K, Urasaki E, Umeno T. et al. The effectiveness of the stereotactic burr hole technique for deep brain stimulation. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2015; 55 (09) 766-772
- 12 Coenen VA, Abdel-Rahman A, McMaster J, Bogod N, Honey CR. Minimizing brain shift during functional neurosurgical procedures - a simple burr hole technique that can decrease CSF loss and intracranial air. Cent Eur Neurosurg 2011; 72 (04) 181-185
- 13 Khan MF, Mewes K, Gross RE, Skrinjar O. Assessment of brain shift related to deep brain stimulation surgery. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2008; 86 (01) 44-53
- 14 Petersen EA, Holl EM, Martinez-Torres I. et al. Minimizing brain shift in stereotactic functional neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 2010; 67 (3 Suppl Operative): ons213-ons221 , discussion ons221
- 15 Winkler D, Tittgemeyer M, Schwarz J, Preul C, Strecker K, Meixensberger J. The first evaluation of brain shift during functional neurosurgery by deformation field analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005; 76 (08) 1161-1163

