La Monte Olivia, Lee Joshua, Dixon Peter R, Moshtaghi Omid, Bennion Douglas M, Schwartz Marc, Friedman Rick
Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery University of California San Diego California USA.
Department of Neurological Surgery University of California San Diego California USA.
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2025 Jul 14;10(4):e70200. doi: 10.1002/lio2.70200. eCollection 2025 Aug.
One theoretical disadvantage of the retrosigmoid approach is the inability to visualize tumor at the fundus of the internal auditory canal, potentially leading to a higher risk of residual tumor even when the surgeon reports a gross total resection. We sought to compare MRI enhancement patterns and their persistence following retrosigmoid and translabyrinthine vestibular schwannoma (VS) resection.
Adults aged ≥ 18 years old who underwent translabyrinthine or retrosigmoid approaches for resection of a sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) at a single tertiary care institution were eligible for inclusion in this cohort study. Patterns of enhancement on postoperative MRI, when present, were qualitatively described as linear or nodular. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for tumor size and resection extent.
After surgeon-reported gross total resection, linear enhancement was present in 24/141 (17.0%) and nodular enhancement in 2/141 (1.4%) cases. Both patterns showed high rates of spontaneous resolution, with 3/24 (12.5%) of linear enhancements persisting on ≥ 2 scans and no nodular enhancements (0/2) persisting. Among patients with less than gross total resection, when present, nodular enhancement was more likely to persist (3/5, 60.0%) than linear enhancement (3/8, 38.0%, < 0.001). Approach was not associated with odds of nodular enhancement (OR for retrosigmoid vs. translabyrinthine 0.36, 95% Cl 0.05-1.89, = 0.2). Similarly, surgical approach was not significantly associated with linear enhancement ( = 0.41). Surgeon-reported gross total resection was associated with reduced odds of nodular enhancement for translabyrinthine (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00-0.63, = 0.04) but not retrosigmoid (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.00-2.76, = 0.13).
Postoperative enhancement typically resolves after gross total resection, but when present, surgeon-reported resection extent is a key predictor of persistence. However, our findings suggest that in retrosigmoid cases-where limited visualization of the fundus may increase the risk of residual tumor-surgeon reports of gross total resection may be less reliable.
IV.
乙状窦后入路的一个理论缺陷是无法看到内耳道底部的肿瘤,即使外科医生报告为肉眼全切,这也可能导致残留肿瘤风险更高。我们试图比较乙状窦后入路和经迷路前庭神经鞘瘤(VS)切除术后的MRI强化模式及其持续性。
在一家三级医疗机构接受经迷路或乙状窦后入路切除散发性前庭神经鞘瘤(VS)的≥18岁成年人符合纳入本队列研究的条件。术后MRI上的强化模式(若存在)定性描述为线性或结节状。采用多变量逻辑回归来调整肿瘤大小和切除范围。
在外科医生报告为肉眼全切后,24/141例(17.0%)出现线性强化,2/141例(1.4%)出现结节状强化。两种模式均显示自发消退率高,24例线性强化中有3例(12.5%)在≥2次扫描时持续存在,结节状强化无持续存在的情况(0/2)。在未达到肉眼全切的患者中,若存在强化,结节状强化比线性强化更可能持续存在(3/5,60.0%比3/8,38.0%,P<0.001)。入路与结节状强化的几率无关(乙状窦后入路与经迷路入路的比值比为0.36,95%可信区间为0.05 - 1.89,P = 0.2)。同样,手术入路与线性强化也无显著关联(P = 0.41)。外科医生报告的肉眼全切与经迷路入路结节状强化几率降低相关(比值比为0.07,95%可信区间为0.00 - 0.63,P = 0.04),但与乙状窦后入路无关(比值比为0.09,95%可信区间为0.00 - 2.76,P = 0.13)。
术后强化通常在肉眼全切后消退,但若存在,外科医生报告的切除范围是持续性的关键预测因素。然而,我们的研究结果表明,在乙状窦后入路的病例中,由于内耳道底部可视范围有限可能增加残留肿瘤风险,外科医生报告的肉眼全切可能不太可靠。
IV级。