4.7 Article

Long-term follow-up of acoustic schwannoma radiosurgery with marginal tumor doses of 12 to 13 Gy

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.01.001

Keywords

radiosurgery; stereotactic; acoustic neuroma; vestibular schwannoma; radiation complications

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To define long-term tumor control and clinical outcomes of radiosurgery with marginal tumor doses of 12 to 13 Gy for unilateral acoustic schwannoma. Methods and Materials: A total of 216 patients with previously untreated unilateral acoustic schwannoma underwent Gamma Knife radiosurgery between 1992 and 2000 with marginal tumor doses of 12 to 13 Gy (median, 13 Gy). Median follow-up was 5.7 years (maximum, 12 years; 41 patients with > 8 years). Treatment volumes were 0.08-37.5 cm(3) (median, 1.3 cm(3)). Results: The 10-year actuarial resection-free control rate was 98.3% +/- 1.0%. Three patients required tumor resection: 2 for tumor growth and 1 partial resection for an enlarging adjacent subarachnoid cyst. Among 121 hearing patients with > 3 years of follow-up, crude hearing preservation rates were 71% for keeping the same Gardner-Robertson hearing level, 74% for serviceable hearing, and 95% for any testable hearing. For 25 of these patients with intracanalicular tumors, the respective rates for preserving the same Gardner-Robertson level, serviceable hearing, and testable hearing were 80%, 88%, and 96%. Ten-year actuarial rates for preserving the same Gardner-Robertson hearing levels, serviceable hearing, any testable hearing, and unchanged facial and trigeminal nerve function were 44.0% +/- 11.7%, 44.5% +/- 10.5%, 85.3% +/- 6.2% +/-, 100%, and 94.9% +/- 1.8%, respectively. Conclusions: Acoustic schwannoma radiosurgery with 12 to 13 Gy provides high rates of long-term tumor control and cranial nerve preservation after long-term follow-up. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available