Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Surgical Resection for Jugular Foramen Schwannomas: A Retrospective Comparative Study of Outcomes.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Operative Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-21 DOI:10.1227/ons.0000000000001534
Amirhossein Akhavan-Sigari, David J Park, Ahed H Kattaa, Yusuke S Hori, Amit R L Persad, Deyaaldeen AbuReesh, Fred C Lam, Sara C Emrich, Louisa Ustrzynski, Armine Tayag, Steven D Chang
{"title":"Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Surgical Resection for Jugular Foramen Schwannomas: A Retrospective Comparative Study of Outcomes.","authors":"Amirhossein Akhavan-Sigari, David J Park, Ahed H Kattaa, Yusuke S Hori, Amit R L Persad, Deyaaldeen AbuReesh, Fred C Lam, Sara C Emrich, Louisa Ustrzynski, Armine Tayag, Steven D Chang","doi":"10.1227/ons.0000000000001534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Jugular foramen schwannomas (JFS) are rare benign tumors arising from lower cranial nerves. In this study, we aim to compare the outcomes of surgical resection (SR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the treatment of JFS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of 31 patients with JFS who underwent SRS (13 patients [41.9%]) or surgical resection (18 patients [58.1%]) as their primary management modality over a two-decade period. Outcomes included progression-free survival, post-treatment adverse events based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, symptom improvement, overall survival, and the necessity for secondary interventions. Local tumor control was also evaluated in all patients who received SRS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics between the SRS and SR groups, including median age (58 vs 48 years, P = .001), largest tumor diameter (32.0 vs 47.5 mm, P = .02), and total tumor volume (6.50 vs 20.5 mm 3 , P = .01). There were no significant differences in sex or lesion morphology (dumbbell vs nondumbbell shaped). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, no significant differences were noted in progression-free survival (90.9 vs 86.2%), overall survival (92.3 vs 100%), symptom improvement (61.5 vs 55.5%), or median Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade (1 in both groups) between the SRS and SR groups, respectively. SRS patients had significantly lower odds of requiring secondary treatment procedures after their primary intervention as compared with those who underwent SR (odds ratio = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.001-0.88, P -value = .04). Local tumor control in all SRS patients (19 patients) was 93.7% and 79.1% at six-month and five-year time points, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SRS and SR demonstrate comparable effectiveness in treating JFS. However, SRS may be a more favorable option because of a reduced need for secondary interventions. Future controlled prospective studies are needed to draw more definitive conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":54254,"journal":{"name":"Operative Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"699-709"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/ons.0000000000001534","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Jugular foramen schwannomas (JFS) are rare benign tumors arising from lower cranial nerves. In this study, we aim to compare the outcomes of surgical resection (SR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the treatment of JFS.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 31 patients with JFS who underwent SRS (13 patients [41.9%]) or surgical resection (18 patients [58.1%]) as their primary management modality over a two-decade period. Outcomes included progression-free survival, post-treatment adverse events based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, symptom improvement, overall survival, and the necessity for secondary interventions. Local tumor control was also evaluated in all patients who received SRS.

Results: Significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics between the SRS and SR groups, including median age (58 vs 48 years, P = .001), largest tumor diameter (32.0 vs 47.5 mm, P = .02), and total tumor volume (6.50 vs 20.5 mm 3 , P = .01). There were no significant differences in sex or lesion morphology (dumbbell vs nondumbbell shaped). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, no significant differences were noted in progression-free survival (90.9 vs 86.2%), overall survival (92.3 vs 100%), symptom improvement (61.5 vs 55.5%), or median Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade (1 in both groups) between the SRS and SR groups, respectively. SRS patients had significantly lower odds of requiring secondary treatment procedures after their primary intervention as compared with those who underwent SR (odds ratio = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.001-0.88, P -value = .04). Local tumor control in all SRS patients (19 patients) was 93.7% and 79.1% at six-month and five-year time points, respectively.

Conclusion: SRS and SR demonstrate comparable effectiveness in treating JFS. However, SRS may be a more favorable option because of a reduced need for secondary interventions. Future controlled prospective studies are needed to draw more definitive conclusions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
立体定向放射外科和手术切除颈静脉孔神经鞘瘤:结果的回顾性比较研究。
背景与目的:颈静脉孔神经鞘瘤(JFS)是一种罕见的起源于下颅神经的良性肿瘤。在本研究中,我们的目的是比较手术切除(SR)和立体定向放射手术(SRS)治疗JFS的效果。方法:我们对31例JFS患者进行了回顾性分析,这些患者在20年的时间里接受了SRS(13例[41.9%])或手术切除(18例[58.1%])作为主要治疗方式。结果包括无进展生存期、基于不良事件通用术语标准的治疗后不良事件、症状改善、总生存期和二次干预的必要性。对所有接受SRS治疗的患者进行局部肿瘤控制评估。结果:SRS组和SR组的基线特征有显著差异,包括中位年龄(58 vs 48岁,P = 0.001)、最大肿瘤直径(32.0 vs 47.5 mm, P = 0.02)和总肿瘤体积(6.50 vs 20.5 mm3, P = 0.01)。性别和病变形态(哑铃形与非哑铃形)无显著差异。在调整基线特征后,SRS组和SR组在无进展生存期(90.9 vs 86.2%)、总生存期(92.3 vs 100%)、症状改善(61.5 vs 55.5%)或不良事件等级通用标准中位数(两组均为1)方面均无显著差异。与接受SR的患者相比,SRS患者在初次干预后需要二次治疗的几率显著降低(优势比= 0.02,95% CI: 0.001-0.88, p值= 0.04)。所有SRS患者(19例)在6个月和5年时间点的局部肿瘤控制率分别为93.7%和79.1%。结论:SRS与SR治疗JFS疗效相当。然而,SRS可能是一个更有利的选择,因为减少了对二次干预的需求。未来的对照前瞻性研究需要得出更明确的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Operative Neurosurgery
Operative Neurosurgery Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.00%
发文量
530
期刊介绍: Operative Neurosurgery is a bi-monthly, unique publication focusing exclusively on surgical technique and devices, providing practical, skill-enhancing guidance to its readers. Complementing the clinical and research studies published in Neurosurgery, Operative Neurosurgery brings the reader technical material that highlights operative procedures, anatomy, instrumentation, devices, and technology. Operative Neurosurgery is the practical resource for cutting-edge material that brings the surgeon the most up to date literature on operative practice and technique
期刊最新文献
Anterior Temporal and Transcavernous Approach for Clipping of an Anterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Aneurysm: 2-Dimensional Operative Video. Applicability of a Dexterity-Enhancing Handheld Robot for 360° Endoscopic Skull Base Approaches: An Exploratory Cadaver Study. Simulation of a Remote Robotic Endovascular Thrombectomy. Recurrent Large Vessel Occlusion After Successful Recanalization From Mechanical Thrombectomy: Risk Factors and Outcomes After Repeat Mechanical Thrombectomy. A Comparative Study of Traditional and Synchronous Video Lateral Spread Response Monitoring in Predicting Long-Term Hemifacial Spasm Relief After Microvascular Decompression Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1