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

Author:

Dayawansa Sam1ORCID,Dumot Chloe2,Mantziaris Georgios2,Mehta Gautam U.34ORCID,Lekovic Gregory P.35,Kondziolka Douglas6,Mathieu David7ORCID,Reda Wael A.89,Liscak Roman10,Cheng-chia Lee1112,Kaufmann Anthony M.13,Barnet Gene14,Trifiletti Daniel M.15ORCID,Lunsford L Dade16,Sheehan Jason2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Gamma Knife Surgery Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

2. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

3. Department of Neurological Surgery, House Ear Institute, Los Angeles, California, United States

4. Department of Neurological Surgery, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

5. Department of Neurosurgery, House Clinic, Los Angeles, California, United States

6. Department of Neurosurgery, New York University Medical Center, New York, New York, United States

7. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

8. Gamma Knife Center Cairo, Nasser Institute Hospital, Cairo, Egypt

9. Department of Neurosurgery, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

10. Department of Stereotactic and Radiation Neurosurgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic

11. Department of Neurosurgery, Taipei Veteran General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

12. Department of Neurosurgery, National Yang-Ming University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

13. Univ Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

14. Department of Neuro Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States

15. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States

16. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Abstract

Abstract 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.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Neurology (clinical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3