BACKGROUND Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is an adjuvant treatment for intracranial lesions that are treatment refractory or in deep or eloquent brain. Initial studies of LITT in surgical neuro-oncology are limited in size and follow-up. OBJECTIVE To present our series of LITT in surgical neuro-oncology to better evaluate procedural safety and outcomes. METHODS An exploratory cohort study of all patients receiving LITT for brain tumors by a single senior neurosurgeon at a single center between 2013 and 2018. Primary outcomes included extent of ablation (EOA), time to recurrence (TTR), local control at 1-yr follow-up, and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included complication rate. Outcomes were compared by tumor subtype. Predictors of outcomes were identified. RESULTS A total of 91 patients underwent 100 LITT procedures; 61% remain alive with 72% local control at median 7.2 mo follow-up. Median TTR and OS were 31.9 and 16.9 mo, respectively. For lesion subtypes, median TTR (months, not applicable [N/A] if <50% rate observed), local control rates at 1-yr follow-up, and median OS (months) were the following: dural-based lesions (n = 4, N/A, 75%, 20.7), metastases (n = 45, 55.9, 77.4%, 16.9), newly diagnosed glioblastoma (n = 11, 31.9, 83.3%, 32.3), recurrent glioblastoma (n = 14, 5.6, 24.3%, 7.3), radiation necrosis (n = 20, N/A, 67.2%, 16.4), and other lesions (n = 6, 12.3, 80%, 24.4). TTR differed by tumor subtype (P = .02, log-rank analysis). EOA predicted local control (P = .009, multivariate proportional hazards regression); EOA > 85% predicted longer TTR (P = .006, log-rank analysis). Complication rate was 4%. CONCLUSION Our series of LITT in surgical neuro-oncology, 1 of the largest to date, further evidences its safety and outcomes profile.

Background Because less-invasive techniques can obviate the need for brain biopsy in the diagnosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), it is common practice to wait for a thorough initial work-up, which may delay treatment. We conducted a systematic review and reviewed our own series of patients to define the role of LP and early brain biopsy in the diagnosis of PCNSL. Methods Our study was divided into 2 main sections: 1) systematic review assessing the sensitivity of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis on the diagnosis of PCNSL, and 2) a retrospective, single-center patient series assessing the diagnostic accuracy and safety of early biopsy in immunocompetent PCNSL patients treated at our institution from 2012 to 2018. Results Our systematic review identified 1481 patients with PCNSL. A preoperative LP obviated surgery in 7.4% of cases. Brain biopsy was the preferred method of diagnosis in 95% of patients followed by CSF (3.1%). In our institutional series, brain biopsy was diagnostic in 92.3% of cases (24/26) with 2 cases that required a second procedure for diagnosis. Perioperative morbidity was noted in 7.6% of cases (n = 2) due to hemorrhages after stereotactic brain biopsy that improved at follow-up. Conclusions The diagnostic yield of CSF analyses for PCNSL in immunocompetent patients remains exceedingly low. Our institutional series demonstrates that early biopsy for PCNSL is safe and accurate, and may avert protracted work-ups. We conclude that performing an early brain biopsy in a suspected case of PCNSL is a valid, safe option to minimize diagnostic delay.

No abstract