Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Mark Bernstein x
  • By Author: Hodaie, Mojgan x
Clear All Modify Search
Free access

Joao Paulo Almeida, Carlos Velásquez, Claire Karekezi, Miguel Marigil, Mojgan Hodaie, James T. Rutka and Mark Bernstein


International collaborations between high-income (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been developed as an attempt to reduce the inequalities in surgical care around the world. In this paper the authors review different models for international surgical education and describe projects developed by the Division of Neurosurgery at the University of Toronto in this field.


The authors conducted a review of models of international surgical education reported in the literature in the last 15 years. Previous publications on global neurosurgery reported by the Division of Neurosurgery at the University of Toronto were reviewed to exemplify the applications and challenges of international surgical collaborations.


The most common models for international surgical education and collaboration include international surgical missions, long-term international partnerships, fellowship training models, and online surgical education. Development of such collaborations involves different challenges, including limited time availability, scarce funding/resources, sociocultural barriers, ethical challenges, and lack of organizational support. Of note, evaluation of outcomes of international surgical projects remains limited, and the development and application of assessment tools, such as the recently proposed Framework for the Assessment of International Surgical Success (FAIRNeSS), is encouraged.


Actions to reduce inequality in surgical care should be implemented around the world. Different models can be used for bilateral exchange of knowledge and improvement of surgical care delivery in regions where there is poor access to surgical care. Implementation of global neurosurgery initiatives faces multiple limitations that can be ameliorated if systematic changes occur, such as the development of academic positions in global surgery, careful selection of participant centers, governmental and nongovernmental financial support, and routine application of outcome evaluation for international surgical collaborations.

Restricted access

Shobhan Vachhrajani, Charbel Fawaz, David Mathieu, Cynthia Ménard, Michael D. Cusimano, Fred Gentili, Mojgan Hodaie, Brendan Kenny, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Normand Laperriere, Michael Schwartz, May Tsao and Mark Bernstein


Gamma Knife surgery (GKS) is used to treat benign and malignant brain tumors, arteriovenous malformations, trigeminal neuralgia, and other conditions. Patients experience reduced neurological morbidity from GKS compared with open microneurosurgery, but risks of radiation injury and technical limitations persist. The authors report treatment complications from the early experience of 2 Canadian GKS programs in Toronto and Sherbrooke.


In Toronto, a prospective administrative database was searched for adverse events and incomplete treatment administrations. In Sherbrooke, data were acquired by chart review. Patients were accrued until August 1, 2007, and a total of 973 patients were included in this report.


During the radiosurgical procedure, 19 patients (2%) suffered anxiety or syncopal episodes, and 2 patients suffered acute coronary events. Treatments were incompletely administered in 12 patients (1.2%). Severe pain was a delayed complication: 8 patients suffered unexpected headaches, and 9 patients developed severe facial pain. New motor deficits developed in 11 patients, including edema-induced ataxia in 4 and one case of facial weakness after treatment of a vestibular schwannoma. Four patients required shunt placement for symptomatic hydrocephalus, and 16 patients suffered delayed seizures.


Gamma Knife surgery is a minimally invasive treatment modality for many intracranial diseases. Treatment is not risk free, and some patients will develop complications; these are likely to decrease as institutional experience matures. Expanding availability and indications necessitate discussion of these risks with patients considering treatment.