INTRODUCTION: Tubular retractors are FDA approved and in the Neurosurgical marketplace, but adaptation has been hampered by lack of evidence showing superiority over traditional retractors when performing subcortical surgery. METHODS: Nine porcine models underwent a simulated neurosurgical operation. Retractors were inserted for four hours after which the porcine model was euthanized. The en-bloc extracted porcine brain was fixed in 10% formalin, paraffin embedded, sectioned at 4 um and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) using standard laboratory protocols. Computer algorithms were generated to calculate areas of cerebral edema and hemorrhage adjacent to retractor surfaces. RESULTS: Using a two-tailed t-test with a significance level of 0.05, traditional brain retractors were associated with statistically significantly greater cerebral edema when compared to tubular retractors (17.36 um2 vs. 12.42 um2; p = 0.0038). There was no statistically significant difference in mean areas of hemorrhage between traditional brain retractors and tubular retractors noted (3.43 um2 vs 3.60 um2; p = 0.8297). CONCLUSION: Tubular retractors are associated with significantly less edema in surrounding brain than traditional retractors. On histopathological merits, this study supports the application of tubular retractors over traditional retractors.