Abstract
BACKGROUND
Although meningiomas are among the most prevalent types of brain tumors, AMs account for around 4% of all meningiomas. AMs tend to be more aggressive with relatively higher rates of recurrence and mortality. Gross total resection (GTR) has been the standard of care when possible. However, GTR itself is not always enough to prevent the recurrence of AMs. The role of PORT remains controversial in AM as the comparative studies to support its use have provided conflicting RESULTS: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of PORT on clinical outcomes according to the extent of resection in AMs.
METHODS
A review of the medical literature was conducted using online databases. Inclusion criteria consisted of AM diagnosis, English language, Simpson graded resections, and comparative studies reporting recurrence rates (RcR), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), and Overall Survival (OS) with hazard ratios (HR) or Kaplan-Meier curves. A meta-analysis was conducted using an inverse variance method with a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Twenty-two comparative studies with a total of 5,129 patients were included and analyzed. When GTR was attained, PORT was associated with improved RcR (HR =0.72, 95%CI:0.59-0.86) and PFS (HR=0.77, 95%CI:0.65-0.90), but not OS (HR=0.93, 95%CI:0.83-1.04). When subtotal resection (STR) was attained, PORT was associated with improved PFS (HR=0.35, 95%CI:0.26-0.48) as well as OS (HR=0.70, 95%CI:0.54-0.89). The extent of surgery also impacted AM outcomes as GTR demonstrated superior PFS (HR=0.45, 95%CI:0.31-0.65) and OS (HR=0.30, 95%CI:0.13-0.72).
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first meta-analysis to show that PORT is associated with PFS benefit in AMs with GTR and STR. Moreover, PORT significantly improved OS of AMs that underwent STR but had no impact on OS when GTR was achieved. In the absence of randomized clinical trials, this meta-analysis represents the most compelling data supporting the use of PORT in this patient population.
Quality of life in Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of comparative studies
