4.6 Article

Analysis of treatment outcome after stereotactic radiosurgery for cavernous sinus meningiomas

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 435-439

Publisher

AMER ASSOC NEUROLOGICAL SURGEONS
DOI: 10.3171/jns.2001.95.3.0435

Keywords

cavernous sinus; meningioma; stereotactic radiosurgery; gamma knife

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Object. The long-term outcome of stereotactic radiosurgery for cavernous sinus (CS) meningiomas is not fully understood. The authors retrospectively reviewed their experience with 40 CS meningiomas treated with gamma knife radiosurgery. Methods. Follow-up periods for the 40 patients ranged from 12 to 123 months (median 42 months), and the overall tumor control rates were 86.4% at 3 years and 82.3% at 10 years. Factors associated with tumor recurrence in univariate analysis were histological malignancy (p < 0.0001). partial treatment (p < 0.0001), suprasellar tumor extension (p = 0.0201), or extension in more than three directions outside the CS (p = 0.0345). When the tumor was completely covered with a dose to the margin that was higher than 14 Gy (Group A, 22 patients), no patient showed recurrence within the median follow-up period of 37 months. On the other hand, when a part of the tumor was treated with 10 to 12 Gy (Group B, 15 patients) or did not receive radiation therapy (Group C, three patients), the recurrence rates were 20% and 100%, respectively. Neurological deterioration was seen in nine patients, but all symptoms were transient or very mild. Conclusions. The data indicate that stereotactic radiosurgery can control tumor growth if the whole mass can be irradiated by dosages of more than 14 Gy. When optimal radiosurgical planning is not feasible because of a tumor's large size, irregular shape, or proximity to visual pathways, use of limited surgical resection before radiosurgery is the best option and should provide sufficient long-term tumor control with minimal complications.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available