OBJECTIVE: Reoperations are part of neurosurgical practice. In these cases, an already formed craniotomy seems the most logical and appropriate. However, reoperations via large approaches can be quite traumatic for the patient. Then minimally invasive approaches, being less traumatic, can be a good alternative. METHODS: We describe seven consecutive patients who underwent reoperations using minimally invasive approaches in the areas of conventional craniotomies. Surgical Theater® visualization platform was used for preoperative planning. The study evaluated the size of surgical approach, surgical efficacy, and the presence of complications. RESULTS: The size of a minimally invasive craniotomy was significantly smaller than that of a conventional approach. The preoperative goals were achieved in all described cases. There were no complications in the early postoperative period. Although the anatomy of the operated brain region in reoperations is altered, keyhole approaches can be successfully used with the support of preoperative planning and intraoperative neuronavigation. Given that the goals of reoperations may differ from those of the primary surgery, and a large approach is more traumatic for the patient, minimally invasive craniotomy can be considered as a good alternative. The successful use of minimally invasive approaches in areas of conventional craniotomies reinforces the philosophy of keyhole neurosurgery. In cases where goals can be achieved using small approaches, it makes no sense to use large conventional ones. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive approaches can be successfully used during reoperations in patients after conventional craniotomies.