Tag: Preoperative

Posted on

Preoperative stereotactic radiosurgery for cerebral metastases: safe, effective, and decreases steroid dependency

J Neurosurg 141:1332–1342, 2024

Preoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is emerging as a viable alternative to standard postoperative SRS. Studies have suggested that preoperative SRS provides comparable tumor control and overall survival (OS) and may reduce the incidence of leptomeningeal disease (LMD) and adverse radiation effects (AREs). It is unknown, however, if preoperative SRS remains effective in cohorts including large brain metastases (> 14 cm 3 ) or if preoperative SRS affects steroid taper/immunotherapy. Here, the authors report the results of a phase 2 single-arm trial assessing a prospectively acquired series of 26 patients who underwent preoperative SRS, without a volumetric cutoff, compared with a propensity score–matched concurrent cohort of 30 patients who underwent postoperative SRS to address these salient questions.

METHODS Demographics, oncological history, surgical details, and outcomes were collected from the medical records. Coprimary endpoints were local tumor control (LTC) and a composite outcome of LTC, ARE, and LMD. Additional outcomes were OS, steroid taper details, and immunotherapy resumption. For survival analyses, cohorts were propensity score matched.

RESULTS Preoperative and postoperative SRS patients were comparable in terms of age, sex, Karnofsky Performance Status score, oncological history, and operative details. Gross tumor volume (GTV) was significantly higher in the preoperative group (median 12.2 vs 5.3 cm 3 , p < 0.001). One-year LTC (preoperative SRS: 77.2% vs postoperative SRS: 82.5%, p = 0.61) and composite outcome (68.3% vs 72.7%, p = 0.38) were not significantly different between the groups. In multivariable analysis, preoperative SRS did not have a significant effect on LTC (HR 1.57 [95% CI 0.38–6.49], p = 0.536) or the composite outcome (HR 1.18 [95% CI 0.38–3.72], p = 0.771), although the confidence intervals were large. The median OS (preoperative SRS: 17.0 vs postoperative SRS: 14.0 months, p = 0.61) was not significantly different. Rates of LMD were nonsignificantly lower in the preoperative SRS group (3.8% vs 16.7%, p = 0.200). Greater GTV volume was associated with prolonged (> 10 days) steroid taper (OR 1.24 [95% CI 1.04–1.55], p = 0.032). However, in multivariable analysis, preoperative SRS markedly reduced the steroid taper length (OR 0.13 [95% CI 0.02–0.61], p = 0.016). Time to immunotherapy was shorter in the preoperative SRS group (36 [IQR 26, 76] vs OR 228 [IQR 129, 436] days, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS Compared with postoperative SRS, preoperative SRS is a safe and effective strategy in the management of cerebral metastases of all sizes and provides comparable tumor control without increased adverse effects. Notably, preoperative SRS enabled rapid steroid taper, even in larger tumors. Future studies should specifically examine the interaction of preoperative SRS with steroid usage and resumption of systemic therapies and the subsequent effects on systemic progression and OS.

Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02514915 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

Posted on

Comparing Preoperative With Postoperative Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Resectable Brain Metastases: A Multi-institutional Analysis

Motor function after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases in the region of the motor cortex

Neurosurgery 79:279–285, 2016

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an increasingly common modality used with surgery for resectable brain metastases (BM).

OBJECTIVE: To present a multi-institutional retrospective comparison of outcomes and toxicities of preoperative SRS (Pre-SRS) and postoperative SRS (Post-SRS).

METHODS: We reviewed the records of patients who underwent resection of BM and either Pre-SRS or Post-SRS alone between 2005 and 2013 at 2 institutions. Pre-SRS used a dose-reduction strategy based on tumor size, with planned resection within 48 hours. Cumulative incidence with competing risks was used to determine estimated rates.

RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent surgical resection for 189 BM: 66 (36.7%) underwent Pre-SRS and 114 (63.3%) underwent Post-SRS. Baseline patient characteristics were balanced except for higher rates of performance status 0 (62.1% vs 28.9%, P , .001) and primary breast cancer (27.2% vs 10.5%, P = .010) for Pre-SRS. Pre-SRS had lower median planning target volume margin (0 mm vs 2 mm) and peripheral dose (14.5 Gy vs 18 Gy), but similar gross tumor volume (8.3 mL vs 9.2 mL, P = .85). The median imaging follow-up period was 24.6 months for alive patients. Multivariable analyses revealed no difference between groups for overall survival (P = .1), local recurrence (P = .24), and distant brain recurrence (P = .75). Post-SRS was associated with significantly higher rates of leptomeningeal disease (2 years: 16.6% vs 3.2%, P = .010) and symptomatic radiation necrosis (2 years: 16.4% vs 4.9%, P = .010).

CONCLUSION: Pre-SRS and Post-SRS for resected BM provide similarly favorable rates of local recurrence, distant brain recurrence, and overall survival, but with significantly lower rates of symptomatic radiation necrosis and leptomeningeal disease in the Pre-SRS cohort. A prospective clinical trial comparing these treatment approaches is warranted.

Posted on

Comparing Preoperative With Postoperative Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Resectable Brain Metastases

Motor function after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases in the region of the motor cortex

Neurosurgery 79:279–285, 2016

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an increasingly common modality used with surgery for resectable brain metastases (BM).

OBJECTIVE: To present a multi-institutional retrospective comparison of outcomes and toxicities of preoperative SRS (Pre-SRS) and postoperative SRS (Post-SRS).

METHODS: We reviewed the records of patients who underwent resection of BM and either Pre-SRS or Post-SRS alone between 2005 and 2013 at 2 institutions. Pre-SRS used a dose-reduction strategy based on tumor size, with planned resection within 48 hours. Cumulative incidence with competing risks was used to determine estimated rates.

RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent surgical resection for 189 BM: 66 (36.7%) underwent Pre-SRS and 114 (63.3%) underwent Post-SRS. Baseline patient characteristics were balanced except for higher rates of performance status 0 (62.1% vs 28.9%, P < .001) and primary breast cancer (27.2% vs 10.5%, P = .010) for Pre-SRS. Pre-SRS had lower median planning target volume margin (0 mm vs 2 mm) and peripheral dose (14.5 Gy vs 18 Gy), but similar gross tumor volume (8.3 mL vs 9.2 mL, P = .85). The median imaging follow-up period was 24.6 months for alive patients. Multivariable analyses revealed no difference between groups for overall survival (P = .1), local recurrence (P = .24), and distant brain recurrence (P = .75). Post-SRS was associated with significantly higher rates of leptomeningeal disease (2 years: 16.6% vs 3.2%, P = .010) and symptomatic radiation necrosis (2 years: 16.4% vs 4.9%, P = .010).

CONCLUSION: Pre-SRS and Post-SRS for resected BM provide similarly favorable rates of local recurrence, distant brain recurrence, and overall survival, but with significantly lower rates of symptomatic radiation necrosis and leptomeningeal disease in the Pre-SRS cohort. A prospective clinical trial comparing these treatment approaches is warranted.

Posted on

Locating and Outlining the Cortical Motor Representation Areas of Facial Muscles With Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Locating and Outlining the Cortical Motor Representation Areas of Facial Muscles With Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Neurosurgery 77:394–405, 2015

Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) has become established as an accurate noninvasive technique for mapping the functional motor cortex for the representation areas of upper and lower limb muscles but not yet for facial musculature.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the applicability and clinical impact of using nTMS to map cortical motor areas of facial muscles in healthy volunteers and neurosurgical tumor patients.

METHODS: Eight healthy volunteers and 12 patients with tumor were studied. The motor threshold (MT) was determined for the abductor pollicis brevis and mentalis muscles. The lateral part of the motor cortex was mapped with suprathreshold stimulation intensity, and motor evoked potentials were recorded from several facial muscles. The patient protocol was modified according to the clinical indication.

RESULTS: In all healthy subjects, motor evoked potentials were elicited in the mentalis (mean latency, 13.4 milliseconds) and orbicularis oris (mean latency, 12.6 milliseconds) muscles. At 110% of MT of the mentalis, the motor evoked potentials of facial muscles were elicited mainly in the precentral gyrus but also from one gyrus anterior and posterior to it. The cortical areas applicable for mapping were limited by an artifact attributable to direct peripheral nerve stimulation. The mapping protocol was successful in 10 of 12 tumor patients at locating the representation area of the lower facial muscles. The MT of the facial muscles was significantly higher than that of the abductor pollicis brevis.

CONCLUSION: nTMS is an applicable and clinically beneficial noninvasive method to preoperatively map the cortical representation areas of the facial muscles in the lower part of the face. Instead of using the MT of the abductor pollicis brevis, the stimulus intensity during mapping should be proportioned to the MT of a facial muscle.

Proudly powered by WordPress