• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Facial Nerve Schwannoma Treatment with Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) versus Resection followed by SRS: Outcomes and a Management Protocol

S. Dayawansa, C. Dumot, G. Mantziaris, GU. Mehta, GP. Lekovic, D. Kondziolka, D. Mathieu, WA. Reda, R. Liscak, L. Cheng-Chia, AM. Kaufmann, G. Barnet, DM. Trifiletti, LD. Lunsford, J. Sheehan

. 2024 ; 85 (1) : 75-80. [pub] 20221230

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Německo

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24005903
E-zdroje Online Plný text

NLK Free Medical Journals od 2012 do Před 1 rokem
PubMed Central od 2012 do Před 1 rokem

Odkazy

PubMed 38274481
DOI 10.1055/a-1990-2861
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

Background Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and resection are treatment options for patients with facial nerve schwannomas without mass effect. Objective This article evaluates outcomes of patients treated with SRS versus resection + SRS. Method We retrospectively compared 43 patients treated with SRS to 12 patients treated with resection + SRS. The primary study outcome was unfavorable combined endpoint, defined as worsening or new clinical symptoms, and/or tumor radiological progression. SRS (38.81 ± 5.3) and resection + SRS (67.14 ± 11.8) groups had similar clinical follow-ups. Results At the time of SRS, the tumor volumes of SRS (mean ± standard error; 1.83 ± 0.35 mL) and resection + SRS (2.51 ± 0.75 mL) groups were similar. SRS (12.15 ± 0.08 Gy) and resection + SRS (12.16 ± 0.14 Gy) groups received similar radiation doses. SRS group (42/43, 98%) had better local tumor control than the resection + SRS group (10/12, 83%, p = 0.04). Most of SRS (32/43, 74%) and resection + SRS (10/12, 83%) group patients reached a favorable combined endpoint following SRS ( p = 0.52). Considering surgical associated side effects, only 2/10 patients of the resection + SRS group reached a favorable endpoint ( p < 0.001). Patients of SRS group, who are > 34 years old ( p = 0.02), have larger tumors (> 4 mL, 0.04), internal auditory canal (IAC) segment tumor involvement ( p = 0.01) were more likely to reach an unfavorable endpoint. Resection + SRS group patients did not show such a difference. Conclusion While resection is still needed for larger tumors, SRS offers better clinical and radiological outcomes compared to resection followed by SRS for facial schwannomas. Younger age, smaller tumors, and non-IAC situated tumors are factors that portend a favorable outcome.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24005903
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240412130852.0
007      
ta
008      
240405s2024 gw f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1055/a-1990-2861 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38274481
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gw
100    1_
$a Dayawansa, Sam $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Gamma Knife Surgery Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States $1 https://orcid.org/0000000225283145
245    10
$a Facial Nerve Schwannoma Treatment with Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) versus Resection followed by SRS: Outcomes and a Management Protocol / $c S. Dayawansa, C. Dumot, G. Mantziaris, GU. Mehta, GP. Lekovic, D. Kondziolka, D. Mathieu, WA. Reda, R. Liscak, L. Cheng-Chia, AM. Kaufmann, G. Barnet, DM. Trifiletti, LD. Lunsford, J. Sheehan
520    9_
$a Background Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and resection are treatment options for patients with facial nerve schwannomas without mass effect. Objective This article evaluates outcomes of patients treated with SRS versus resection + SRS. Method We retrospectively compared 43 patients treated with SRS to 12 patients treated with resection + SRS. The primary study outcome was unfavorable combined endpoint, defined as worsening or new clinical symptoms, and/or tumor radiological progression. SRS (38.81 ± 5.3) and resection + SRS (67.14 ± 11.8) groups had similar clinical follow-ups. Results At the time of SRS, the tumor volumes of SRS (mean ± standard error; 1.83 ± 0.35 mL) and resection + SRS (2.51 ± 0.75 mL) groups were similar. SRS (12.15 ± 0.08 Gy) and resection + SRS (12.16 ± 0.14 Gy) groups received similar radiation doses. SRS group (42/43, 98%) had better local tumor control than the resection + SRS group (10/12, 83%, p = 0.04). Most of SRS (32/43, 74%) and resection + SRS (10/12, 83%) group patients reached a favorable combined endpoint following SRS ( p = 0.52). Considering surgical associated side effects, only 2/10 patients of the resection + SRS group reached a favorable endpoint ( p < 0.001). Patients of SRS group, who are > 34 years old ( p = 0.02), have larger tumors (> 4 mL, 0.04), internal auditory canal (IAC) segment tumor involvement ( p = 0.01) were more likely to reach an unfavorable endpoint. Resection + SRS group patients did not show such a difference. Conclusion While resection is still needed for larger tumors, SRS offers better clinical and radiological outcomes compared to resection followed by SRS for facial schwannomas. Younger age, smaller tumors, and non-IAC situated tumors are factors that portend a favorable outcome.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Dumot, Chloe $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
700    1_
$a Mantziaris, Georgios $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
700    1_
$a Mehta, Gautam U $u Department of Neurological Surgery, House Ear Institute, Los Angeles, California, United States $u Department of Neurological Surgery, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States $1 https://orcid.org/0000000280096430
700    1_
$a Lekovic, Gregory P $u Department of Neurological Surgery, House Ear Institute, Los Angeles, California, United States $u Department of Neurosurgery, House Clinic, Los Angeles, California, United States
700    1_
$a Kondziolka, Douglas $u Department of Neurosurgery, New York University Medical Center, New York, New York, United States
700    1_
$a Mathieu, David $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada $1 https://orcid.org/0000000320296315
700    1_
$a Reda, Wael A $u Gamma Knife Center Cairo, Nasser Institute Hospital, Cairo, Egypt $u Department of Neurosurgery, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
700    1_
$a Liscak, Roman $u Department of Stereotactic and Radiation Neurosurgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Cheng-Chia, Lee $u Department of Neurosurgery, Taipei Veteran General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan $u Department of Neurosurgery, National Yang-Ming University, Hsinchu, Taiwan
700    1_
$a Kaufmann, Anthony M $u Univ Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
700    1_
$a Barnet, Gene $u Department of Neuro Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
700    1_
$a Trifiletti, Daniel M $u Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States $1 https://orcid.org/0000000291502916
700    1_
$a Lunsford, L Dade $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
700    1_
$a Sheehan, Jason $u Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
773    0_
$w MED00179152 $t Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base $x 2193-6331 $g Roč. 85, č. 1 (2024), s. 75-80
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38274481 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20240405 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240412130845 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2076063 $s 1215665
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 85 $c 1 $d 75-80 $e 20221230 $i 2193-6331 $m Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base $n J Neurol Surg B Skull Base $x MED00179152
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20240405

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace