Correction to: First results on survival from a large Phase 3 clinical trial of an autologous dendritic cell vaccine in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in the spelling of one of the author names. In this Correction the incorrect and correct author names are indicated and the author name has been updated in the original publication. The authors also reported an error in the Methods section of the original article. In this Correction the incorrect and correct versions of the affected sentence are indicated. The original article has not been updated with regards to the error in the Methods section.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144529/1/12967_2018_Article_1552.pd

Multiport minimally invasive skull base surgery: how many ports are too many?

Surgical access to the ventral skull base has evolved considerably over the past several years with the introduction of minimally invasive endoscopic and endoscope-assisted approaches. The accompanying manuscript by Ciporen et al. demonstrates an addition to this growing body of literature in their description of the feasibility of multiportal endoscopic approaches to the skull base, particularly the precaruncular transorbital approach, in a series of cadaver dissections. Similar to laparoscopic abdominal surgery, which utilizes multiple small ports to improve visualization and manipulation, they envision a modular combination of approaches that allows an endoscope to be placed in one port and surgery performed through additional ports. One could imagine such an approach lending itself to the use of the DaVinci robot, which also requires multiple ports of access. However, the utility of the endonasal and transcranial approaches alone or in combination have already been demonstrated (1-9). The novelty of this paper lies in the additional evaluation of the less well-described precaruncular transorbital approach. This approach has been best described by the group in Seattle who also authored the current articl

Launching the Quality Outcomes Database Tumor Registry: rationale, development, and pilot data

OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgeons generate an enormous amount of data daily. Within these data lie rigorous, valid, and reproducible evidence. Such evidence can facilitate healthcare reform and improve quality of care. To measure the quality of care provided objectively, evaluating the safety and efficacy of clinical activities should occur in real time. Registries must be constructed and collected data analyzed with the precision akin to that of randomized clinical trials to accomplish this goal. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Tumor Registry was launched in February 2019 with 8 sites in its initial 1-year pilot phase. The Tumor Registry was proposed by the AANS/CNS Tumor Section and approved by the QOD Scientific Committee in the fall of 2018. The initial pilot phase aimed to assess the feasibility of collecting outcomes data from 8 academic practices across the United States; these outcomes included length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient complications. RESULTS: As of November 2019, 923 eligible patients have been entered, with the following subsets: intracranial metastasis (17.3%, n = 160), high-grade glioma (18.5%, n = 171), low-grade glioma (6%, n = 55), meningioma (20%, n = 184), pituitary tumor (14.3%, n = 132), and other intracranial tumor (24%, n = 221). CONCLUSIONS: The authors have demonstrated here, as a pilot study, the feasibility of documenting demographic, clinical, operative, and patient-reported outcome characteristics longitudinally for 6 common intracranial tumor types

Launching the Quality Outcomes Database Tumor Registry: rationale, development, and pilot data

OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgeons generate an enormous amount of data daily. Within these data lie rigorous, valid, and reproducible evidence. Such evidence can facilitate healthcare reform and improve quality of care. To measure the quality of care provided objectively, evaluating the safety and efficacy of clinical activities should occur in real time. Registries must be constructed and collected data analyzed with the precision akin to that of randomized clinical trials to accomplish this goal. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Tumor Registry was launched in February 2019 with 8 sites in its initial 1-year pilot phase. The Tumor Registry was proposed by the AANS/CNS Tumor Section and approved by the QOD Scientific Committee in the fall of 2018. The initial pilot phase aimed to assess the feasibility of collecting outcomes data from 8 academic practices across the United States; these outcomes included length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient complications. RESULTS: As of November 2019, 923 eligible patients have been entered, with the following subsets: intracranial metastasis (17.3%, n = 160), high-grade glioma (18.5%, n = 171), low-grade glioma (6%, n = 55), meningioma (20%, n = 184), pituitary tumor (14.3%, n = 132), and other intracranial tumor (24%, n = 221). CONCLUSIONS: The authors have demonstrated here, as a pilot study, the feasibility of documenting demographic, clinical, operative, and patient-reported outcome characteristics longitudinally for 6 common intracranial tumor types

Correction to: First results on survival from a large Phase 3 clinical trial of an autologous dendritic cell vaccine in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in the spelling of one of the author names. In this Correction the incorrect and correct author names are indicated and the author name has been updated in the original publication. The authors also reported an error in the Methods section of the original article. In this Correction the incorrect and correct versions of the affected sentence are indicated. The original article has not been updated with regards to the error in the Methods section