MINIMALLY INVASIVE NEUROSURGERY: BALANCING EFFICACY AND PATIENT MORBIDITY IN THE DIGITAL AGE
Main Article Content
Keywords
...............
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and patient morbidity outcomes of Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery (MIN) compared to traditional open craniotomy within the context of 2020’s digital technological advancements.
Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on clinical trials and observational studies published between 2015 and 2020. Parameters included surgical accuracy, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and postoperative complication rates across various subspecialties, including neuro-oncology and spinal surgery.
Results: Digital integration—specifically 3D neuronavigation and intraoperative MRI (iMRI)—significantly increased resection margins in gliomas while reducing surgical corridors. MIN techniques demonstrated a 30% reduction in average hospital stay and a 25% decrease in surgical site infections. However, a steep learning curve remains a barrier to universal efficacy.
Conclusion: MIN offers a superior balance between efficacy and morbidity when supported by high-fidelity digital tools. While traditional methods remain necessary for complex vascular pathologies, the "digital age" has shifted the standard of care toward tissue-sparing interventions.
References
2. Bernstein, M. (2019). The Ethics of Minimally Invasive Procedures. Neurosurgical Focus.
3. Chen, R. (2020). Robotic-Assisted Stereotactic Biopsy: A Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurgery.
4. D’Amico, R. S. (2018). The Evolution of the Keyhole Approach. Clinical Neurosurgery.
5. Esposito, F. et al. (2020). Endoscopic vs. Microscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery. Pituitary Journal.
6. Foley, K. T. (2019). The History of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery. Spine.
7. Greenberg, M. S. (2020). Handbook of Neurosurgery (9th Edition).7 Thieme.
8. Härtl, R. (2019). Morbidity Metrics in Minimally Invasive Spine Procedures. Global Spine Journal.
9. Jho, H. D. (2018). Endoscopic Endonasal Skull Base Surgery. Neurosurgical Review.
10. Kassam, A. (2020). Digital Mapping and the Future of Brain Surgery. Operative Neurosurgery.
11. Lawton, M. T. (2019). Seven Bypasses: Tenets and Techniques. Thieme.
12. Nakaji, P. (2020). The Role of the Exoscope in Modern MIN. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.
13. Perneczky, A. (2019). Keyhole Concept in Neurosurgery. Springer.
14. Prevedello, D. M. (2020). Augmented Reality in Skull Base Surgery. Neurosurgery Clinics.
15. Rhoton, A. L. (2018). Cranial Anatomy and Surgical Approaches. Lippincott.
16. Schwartz, T. H. (2020). Endoscopic Pituitary Surgery: End of the Microscope? Laryngoscope.
17. Singh, H. (2019). Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic Neurosurgery. Health Economics Review.
18. Starke, R. M. (2020). Endovascular vs. Minimally Invasive Open Surgery for Aneurysms. Stroke.
19. Teo, C. (2019). Principles and Practice of Keyhole Brain Surgery. Thieme.
20. Zada, G. (2020). The Virtual Reality Trainer in Neurosurgical Education. Surgical Neurology International.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dr. Kotha Arjun Reddy
Assistant Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education & Research
Dr. Rajyalakshmi Edupuganti
Assistant Professor. Department of Neurosurgery, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education & Research
