Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2025 Jun 25;48(1):529.
doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03642-7.

Using a syringe as tubular retractor and working channel in minimally invasive cranial and spinal neurosurgery

Affiliations
Case Reports

Using a syringe as tubular retractor and working channel in minimally invasive cranial and spinal neurosurgery

Guenther C Feigl et al. Neurosurg Rev. .

Abstract

Minimally invasive spinal and cranial neurosurgery often requires tissue retraction. However, excessive tissue retraction is contrary to the principles of minimally invasive neurosurgery. Therefore, any retractor used should be small and atraumatic. Circular plastic retractors made from syringes of various sizes meet these requirements. We report a case series of patients with various cranial and spinal pathologies who underwent surgeries using "self-made" retractors made from plastic syringes of various sizes (2 mL, 5 mL, and 10 mL). All surgeries were performed via minimally invasive approaches. In all cases, the goals of surgical treatment were achieved with no neurological deficits. The use of "self-made" plastic retractors can be helpful in spinal and cranial minimally invasive neurosurgery. Making retractors from plastic syringes and using them is not labor-intensive. This method can extend the possibilities of the neurosurgeon, especially in the field of minimally invasive neurosurgery. Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

Keywords: Keyhole neurosurgery; Retractor; Syringe.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval: This study was approved by the local ethics committee. Consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Rosenfeld JV (1996) Minimally invasive neurosurgery. Aust N Z J Surg 66(8). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1996.tb00808.x
    1. Garrett M, Consiglieri G, Nakaji P (2010) Transcranial minimally invasive neurosurgery for tumors. Neurosurg Clin N Am 21(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2010.07.002
    1. Ishii M, Gallia GL (2010) Application of technology for minimally invasive neurosurgery. Neurosurg Clin N Am 21(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2010.07.009
    1. Staribacher D, Feigl GC, Britz G, Kuzmin D (2024) Minimally invasive approaches in reoperations after conventional craniotomies: case series. J Korean Neurosurg Soc Published Online June 11. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2024.0085
    1. Feigl GC, Staribacher D, Britz G, Kuzmin D (2024) Minimally invasive approaches in the surgical treatment of intracranial meningiomas: an analysis of 54 cases. Brain Tumor Res Treat 12(2):93. https://doi.org/10.14791/btrt.2024.0005 - DOI - PubMed - PMC

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources