Optimal Timing of Primary Radiosurgical Treatment of Growing Vestibular Schwannoma: Insights From Salvage Microsurgery Outcomes

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: Limited evidence guides the optimal timing of treatment after the detection of tumor growth during the observation of sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS). The current work aimed to inform the timing of radiosurgical intervention based on an analysis of patient outcomes among those who ultimately failed stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and underwent salvage microsurgery. STUDY DESIGN: A historical cohort study. SETTING: Seven centers across the United States and Norway. METHODS: Adults with sporadic VS who underwent salvage microsurgery following failed primary SRS were included. The primary outcome of interest was the association between tumor size at the time of primary SRS and the ability to achieve gross total resection (GTR) and maintain postoperative House-Brackmann (HB) facial nerve grade I at the last follow-up after salvage microsurgery. RESULTS: Among 96 patients, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) cerebellopontine angle (CPA) tumor size at primary SRS was 14.5 mm (10.0-19.0). Each 1-mm increase in CPA tumor size at the time of primary SRS was associated with a 13% increased likelihood of near-total/subtotal resection or most recent postoperative HB grade >I (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.21, P = .001), with an optimal tumor size threshold to distinguish this outcome of 12 mm of CPA extension (c-index 0.73). Similarly, for each 1-mm increase in CPA tumor size at the time of primary SRS, a 9% increase in any postoperative complication with salvage microsurgery was observed (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.15, P = .009). CONCLUSION: Corroborated by size threshold surveillance data informing the timing of primary microsurgical resection, the current study suggests that VS outcomes are optimized when primary radiosurgical intervention is undertaken on growing tumors when they harbor 10-15 mm of cerebellopontine angle extension or less.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.