Resection of vestibular schwannomas after stereotactic radiosurgery: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Max Whitmeyer ◽  
Bledi C. Brahimaj ◽  
André Beer-Furlan ◽  
Sameer Alvi ◽  
Madeline J. Epsten ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEMultiple short series have evaluated the efficacy of salvage microsurgery (MS) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for treatment of vestibular schwannomas (VSs); however, there is a lack of a large volume of patient data available for interpretation and clinical adaptation. The goal of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of tumor characteristics, management, and surgical outcomes of salvage of MS after SRS for VS.METHODSThe Medline/PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were queried according to PRISMA guidelines. All English-language and translated publications were included. Studies lacking adequate study characteristics and outcomes were excluded. Cases involving neurofibromatosis type 2, previous MS, or malignant transformation were excluded when possible.RESULTSTwenty studies containing 297 cases met inclusion criteria. Three additional cases from Rush University Medical Center were added for 300 total cases. Tumor growth with or without symptoms was the primary indication for salvage surgery (92.3% of cases), followed by worsening of symptoms without growth (4.6%) and cystic enlargement (3.1%). The average time to MS after SRS was 39.4 months. The average size and volume of tumor at surgery were 2.44 cm and 5.92 cm3, respectively. The surgical approach was retrosigmoid (42.8%) and translabyrinthine (57.2%); 59.5% of patients had a House-Brackmann (HB) grade of I or II. The facial nerve was preserved in 91.5% of cases. Facial nerve preservation and HB grades were lower for the translabyrinthine versus retrosigmoid approach (p = 0.31 and p = 0.18, respectively); however, fewer complications were noted in the translabyrinthine approach (p = 0.29). Gross-total resection (GTR) was completed in 55.7% of surgeries. Studies that predominantly used subtotal resection (STR) were associated with a lower rate of facial nerve injury (5.3% vs 11.3%, p = 0.07) and higher rate of HB grade I or II (72.9% vs 48.0%, p = 0.00003) versus those using predominantly GTR. However, majority STR was associated with a recurrence rate of 3.6% as compared to 1.4% for majority GTR (p = 0.29).CONCLUSIONSThis study showed that the leading cause of MS after SRS was tumor growth at an average of 39.4 months after radiation. There were no significant differences in outcomes of facial nerve preservation, postoperative HB grade, or complication rate based on surgical approach. Patients who underwent STR showed statistically significant better HB outcomes compared with GTR. MS after SRS was considered by most authors to be more difficult than primary MS. These data support the notion that the surgical goals of salvage surgery are debulking of tumor mass, decreasing compression of the brainstem, and not necessarily pursuing GTR.

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. E2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reid Hoshide ◽  
Harrison Faulkner ◽  
Mario Teo ◽  
Charles Teo

OBJECTIVEThere are numerous treatment strategies in the management for large vestibular schwannomas, including resection only, staged resections, resections followed by radiosurgery, and radiosurgery only. Recent evidence has pointed toward maximal resection as being the optimum strategy to prevent tumor recurrence; however, durable tumor control through aggressive resection has been shown to occur at the expense of facial nerve function and to risk other approach-related complications. Through a retrospective analysis of their single-institution series of keyhole neurosurgical approaches for large vestibular schwannomas, the authors aim to report and justify key techniques to maximize tumor resection and reduce surgical morbidity.METHODSA retrospective chart review was performed at the Centre for Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery. All patients who had undergone a keyhole retrosigmoid approach for the resection of large vestibular schwannomas, defined as having a tumor diameter of ≥ 3.0 cm, were included in this review. Patient demographics, preoperative cranial nerve status, perioperative data, and postoperative follow-up were obtained. A review of the literature for resections of large vestibular schwannomas was also performed. The authors’ institutional data were compared with the historical data from the literature.RESULTSBetween 2004 and 2017, 45 patients met the inclusion criteria for this retrospective chart review. When compared with findings in a historical cohort in the literature, the authors’ minimally invasive, keyhole retrosigmoid technique for the resection of large vestibular schwannomas achieved higher rates of gross-total or near-total resection (100% vs 83%). Moreover, these results compare favorably with the literature in facial nerve preservation (House-Brackmann I–II) at follow-up after gross-total resections (81% vs 47%, p < 0.001) and near-total resections (88% vs 75%, p = 0.028). There were no approach-related complications in this series.CONCLUSIONSIt is the experience of the senior author that complete or near-complete resection of large vestibular schwannomas can be successfully achieved via a keyhole approach. In this series of 45 large vestibular schwannomas, a greater extent of resection was achieved while demonstrating high rates of facial nerve preservation and low approach-related and postoperative complications compared with the literature.


Neurosurgery ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (CN_suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 270-270
Author(s):  
Jonathan D Breshears ◽  
Carlene Partow ◽  
Tarik Tihan ◽  
Michael William McDermott ◽  
Patricia Sneed ◽  
...  

Abstract INTRODUCTION Maximal safe resection is an optimal surgical strategy for moderate-to-large vestibular schwannomas, however data on the long-term outcomes of residual tumor after STR is lacking. The goal of this study was to review our rates of residual tumor growth, and the control rates of salvage versus upfront stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS This retrospective single-institution study included all sporadic vestibular schwannomas treated primarily with STR at our institution from 2002 2015. The primary outcome was tumor growth requiring salvage treatment, and response to salvage treatment (surgery or SRS). Patients treated with upfront SRS after surgery were analyzed separately. RESULTS >295 patients underwent primary surgery for a vestibular schwannoma between 2002 - 2015, including 140 STRs. 49 cases with <1 year follow-up were excluded. 17 cases received upfront SRS after surgery (12 Gamma Knife, 12Gy; 5 CyberKnife, 25Gy in 5 fractions), with 2 failures requiring salvage surgery at 1.6 and 2.6 years (88% control rate at 1.8 years). Seventy-four residual tumors were managed with observation after STR. 57 (77%) remained stable at a median 4.1 years. 17 tumors (23%) progressed, requiring salvage treatment at a median of 2.8 years. Eleven received Gamma Knife (12.5 Gy) with a 100% control rate 2.3 years after SRS. One received Cyber Knife (18Gy, 3 fractions), ultimately requiring repeat surgery 3 years later. 4 residual tumors received salvage surgery at a median interval of 5 years after STR, and one was lost to follow-up. The control rate of salvage SRS was 92% at 2.3 years median follow-up. CONCLUSION A majority (77%) of residual vestibular schwannomas remained stable after a primary STR. Both upfront and salvage SRS had good control rates (∼90%) in our series. Further study is needed to define the role of upfront versus salvage SRS after a primary STR.


2019 ◽  
Vol 161 (7) ◽  
pp. 1449-1456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prasanth Romiyo ◽  
Edwin Ng ◽  
Dillon Dejam ◽  
Kevin Ding ◽  
John P Sheppard ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 73 (S 02) ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Matthies ◽  
J. Perez ◽  
F. Raslan ◽  
G. Vince ◽  
T. Westermaier ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 75 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amjad Anaizi ◽  
Eric Gantwerker ◽  
Myles Pensak ◽  
Philip Theodosopoulos

2014 ◽  
Vol 75 (S 02) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cordula Matthies ◽  
M. Hummel ◽  
J. Perez ◽  
R. Hagen ◽  
R. Ernestus

Skull Base ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Awadhesh Jaiswal ◽  
Sushila Jaiswal ◽  
Arun Srivastava ◽  
Rabi Sahu ◽  
Sanjay Behari ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document