4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for the treatment of vestibular schwannomas: Combined experience of the Toronto-Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre and the Princess Margaret Hospital

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02779-7

关键词

acoustic neuroma; radiotherapy; stereotactic technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) for vestibular schwannomas in patients treated at two university-affiliated hospitals. Methods and Materials: Thirty-nine patients were treated between April 1996 and September 2000. The median age was 56 years (range: 29 - 80), and median maximal tumor diameter was 20 mm (range: 9 - 40). A total of 11 patients had fifth and/or seventh cranial nerve dysfunction before irradiation; 2 patients had only facial weakness, 5 patients had only facial numbness, and 4 patients had both facial weakness and numbness. Thirty-three patients were treated with primary FSRT, and 6 patients were treated for recurrent or persistent disease after previous surgery. All patients were treated with 6-MV photons using a stereotactic system with a relocatabIe frame. The 39 patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks. Median follow-up was 21.8 months (range: 4.4-49.6). Results: Local control was achieved in 37 patients (95%). Two patients experienced deterioration of their symptoms at 3 and 20 months as a result of clinical progression in one case and tumor progression in the other and underwent surgery post FSRT. A total of 19/28 (67.9%) patients preserved serviceable hearing after FSRT. Deterioration of the facial and trigeminal nerves was observed in only 2 patients who were treated with surgery post FSRT. Conclusion: FSRT provided excellent tumor control with minimal morbidity and good hearing preservation in this cohort of patients. Longer follow-up is required to confirm long-term control rates. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据