Di Long, Shah Ashish H, Mahavadi Anil, Eichberg Daniel G, Reddy Raghuram, Sanjurjo Alexander D, Morell Alexis A, Lu Victor M, Ampie Leonel, Luther Evan M, Komotar Ricardo J, Ivan Michael E
1Department of Neurosurgery and.
3Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia.
J Neurosurg. 2022 May 27;138(1):62-69. doi: 10.3171/2022.3.JNS212399. Print 2023 Jan 1.
Supramaximal resection (SMR) has arisen as a possible surrogate to gross-total resection (GTR) to improve survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM). However, SMR has traditionally been limited to noneloquent regions and its feasibility in eloquent nGBM remains unclear. The authors conducted a retrospective multivariate propensity-matched analysis comparing survival outcomes for patients with left-sided eloquent nGBM undergoing SMR versus GTR.
A retrospective review was performed of all patients at our institution who underwent SMR or GTR of a left-sided eloquent nGBM during the period from 2011 to 2020. All patients underwent some form of preoperative or intraoperative functional mapping and underwent awake or asleep craniotomy (craniotomy under general anesthesia); however, awake craniotomy was performed in the majority of patients and the focus of the study was SMR achieved via awake craniotomy and functional mapping with lesionectomy and additional peritumoral fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) resection. Propensity scores were generated controlling for age, tumor location, and preoperative Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score with the nearest-neighbor algorithm.
A total of 102 patients (48 SMR, 54 GTR) were included in this study. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients receiving SMR were 22.9 and 5.1 months, respectively. Propensity matching resulted in a final cohort of 27 SMR versus 27 GTR patients. SMR conferred improved OS (21.55 vs 15.49 months, p = 0.0098) and PFS (4.51 vs 3.59 months, p = 0.041) compared to GTR. There was no significant difference in postoperative complication rates or KPS score in SMR compared with GTR patients (p = 0.236 and p = 0.736, respectively). In patients receiving SMR, improved OS and PFS showed a dose-dependent relationship with extent of FLAIR resection (EOFR) on log-rank test for trend (p < 0.001).
SMR by means of awake craniotomy with functional mapping for left-sided eloquent nGBM is safe and confers a survival benefit compared to GTR obtained with lesionectomy alone while preserving postoperative neurological integrity. When tolerated, greater EOFR with SMR may be associated with improved survival.
超全切除(SMR)已成为一种可能替代全切除(GTR)的方法,以提高新诊断的胶质母细胞瘤(nGBM)患者的生存率。然而,传统上SMR仅限于非功能区,其在功能区nGBM中的可行性仍不明确。作者进行了一项回顾性多变量倾向匹配分析,比较接受SMR与GTR的左侧功能区nGBM患者的生存结果。
对2011年至2020年期间在本机构接受左侧功能区nGBM的SMR或GTR的所有患者进行回顾性研究。所有患者均接受了某种形式的术前或术中功能定位,并接受了清醒或麻醉下开颅手术(全身麻醉下开颅);然而,大多数患者接受了清醒开颅手术,研究重点是通过清醒开颅手术和功能定位进行的SMR,包括病变切除术和额外的瘤周液体衰减反转恢复(FLAIR)切除。使用最近邻算法生成倾向评分,以控制年龄、肿瘤位置和术前卡诺夫斯基表现状态(KPS)评分。
本研究共纳入102例患者(48例SMR,54例GTR)。接受SMR的患者的中位总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)分别为22.9个月和5.1个月。倾向匹配后最终队列包括27例SMR患者和27例GTR患者。与GTR相比,SMR可改善OS(21.55对15.49个月,p = 0.0098)和PFS(4.51对3.59个月,p = 0.041)。与GTR患者相比,SMR患者的术后并发症发生率或KPS评分无显著差异(分别为p = 0.236和p = 0.736)。在接受SMR的患者中,在对数秩趋势检验中,改善的OS和PFS与FLAIR切除范围(EOFR)呈剂量依赖关系(p < 0.001)。
对于左侧功能区nGBM,通过清醒开颅手术和功能定位进行SMR是安全的,与单独进行病变切除术获得的GTR相比,可带来生存益处,同时保留术后神经功能完整性。在可耐受的情况下,SMR更大的EOFR可能与生存率提高相关。