Object. The goal of this article was to show that a combination of facial nerve-sparing microsurgical resection and Gamma Knife surgery (GKS) for expansion of any residual tumor can preserve good facial nerve function in patients with recurrent vestibular schwannoma (VS).Methods. Records of individuals treated by a single surgeon with a facial nerve-sparing technique for a VS between 1998 and 2009 were retrospectively analyzed for tumor recurrence. Of the 383 patients treated for VS, 151 underwent microsurgical resection, and 20 (13.2%) of these patients required postoperative retreatment for a significant expansion of residual tumor after microsurgery. These 20 patients were re-treated with GKS.Results. The rate of preservation of good facial nerve function (Grade I or II on the House-Brackmann scale) in patients treated with microsurgery for VS was 97%. Both subtotal and gross-total resection had excellent facial nerve preservation rates (97% vs 96%), although subtotal resection carried a higher risk that patients would require retreatment. In patients re-treated with GKS after microsurgery, the rate of facial nerve preservation was 95%.Conclusions. In patients with tumors that cannot be managed with radiosurgery alone, a facial nerve-sparing resection followed by GKS for any significant regrowth provides excellent facial nerve preservation rates. (DOI: 10.3171/2011.7.JNS101921) key WoRDs • vestibular schwannoma • facial nerve • Gamma Knife surgery • tumor recurrence • peripheral nerve 917Abbreviations used in this paper: GKS = Gamma Knife surgery; GTR = gross-total resection; HB = House-Brackmann; IAC = internal auditory canal; NF2 = neurofibromatosis Type 2; STR = subtotal resection; VS = vestibular schwannoma.

Background The traditional model of promotion and tenure in the health professions relies heavily on formal scholarship through teaching, research, and service. Institutions consider how much weight to give activities in each of these areas and determine a threshold for advancement. With the emergence of social media, scholars can engage wider audiences in creative ways and have a broader impact. Conventional metrics like the h-index do not account for social media impact. Social media engagement is poorly represented in most curricula vitae (CV) and therefore is undervalued in promotion and tenure reviews. Objective The objective was to develop crowdsourced guidelines for documenting social media scholarship. These guidelines aimed to provide a structure for documenting a scholar’s general impact on social media, as well as methods of documenting individual social media contributions exemplifying innovation, education, mentorship, advocacy, and dissemination. Methods To create unifying guidelines, we created a crowdsourced process that capitalized on the strengths of social media and generated a case example of successful use of the medium for academic collaboration. The primary author created a draft of the guidelines and then sought input from users on Twitter via a publicly accessible Google Document. There was no limitation on who could provide input and the work was done in a democratic, collaborative fashion. Contributors edited the draft over a period of 1 week (September 12-18, 2020). The primary and secondary authors then revised the draft to make it more concise. The guidelines and manuscript were then distributed to the contributors for edits and adopted by the group. All contributors were given the opportunity to serve as coauthors on the publication and were told upfront that authorship would depend on whether they were able to document the ways in which they met the 4 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors authorship criteria. Results We developed 2 sets of guidelines: Guidelines for Listing All Social Media Scholarship Under Public Scholarship (in Research/Scholarship Section of CV) and Guidelines for Listing Social Media Scholarship Under Research, Teaching, and Service Sections of CV. Institutions can choose which set fits their existing CV format. Conclusions With more uniformity, scholars can better represent the full scope and impact of their work. These guidelines are not intended to dictate how individual institutions should weigh social media contributions within promotion and tenure cases. Instead, by providing an initial set of guidelines, we hope to provide scholars and their institutions with a common format and language to document social media scholarship.

No abstract

No abstract