Background: High-grade gliomas impose substantial morbidity and mortality due to rapid cancer progression and recurrence. Factors such as surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy remain the cornerstones for treatment of brain cancer and brain cancer research. The role of anesthetics on glioma progression is largely unknown.Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study compared patients who underwent high-grade glioma resection with minimal sedation (awake craniotomy) and those who underwent craniotomy with general anesthesia (GA). Various perioperative factors, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and adjuvant treatment regimens were recorded. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), postoperative pain score, and length of hospital stay.Results: A total of 891 patients were included; 79% received GA, and 21% underwent awake craniotomy. There was no difference in median PFS between awake craniotomy (0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.65 y) and GA (0.53, 95% CI: 0.48-0.60 y) groups (hazard ratio 1.05; P < 0.553). Median OS was significantly longer in the awake craniotomy (1.70, 95% CI: 1.30-2.32 y) compared with that in the GA (1.25, 95% CI: 1.15-1.37 y) group (hazard ratio 0.76; P < 0.009) but this effect did not persist after controlling for other variables of interest. Median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the awake craniotomy group (2 [range: 0 to 76], interquartile range 3 d vs. 5 [0 to 98], interquartile range 5 for awake craniotomy and GA groups, respectively; P < 0.001). Pain scores were comparable between groups.Conclusions: There was no difference in PFS and OS between patients who underwent surgical resection of high-grade glioma with minimal sedation (awake craniotomy) or GA. Further large prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to explore the role of anesthetics on glioma progression and patient survival.

Background: The role of high-field 3-Tesla intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (I-MRI) during awake craniotomy (AC) has not been extensively studied. We report the feasibility and safety of AC during 3-Tesla I-MRI.Methods: This retrospective descriptive report compared 3 groups: AC with minimal sedation and I-MRI; I-MRI-guided craniotomy under general anesthesia (GA), and; AC without I-MRI. Perioperative factors, surgical, anesthetic and radiologic complications, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were recorded.Results: Overall, 85 patients are included in this report. Five of 23 patients (22%) who underwent AC with I-MRI had anesthetic complications (nausea/vomiting and conversion to GA) compared with 3 of 40 (8%) who underwent I-MRI-guided craniotomy under GA (nausea/vomiting during extubation, and arrhythmia). Intraoperative surgical complications (seizures and speech deficits) occurred in 5 patients (22%) who underwent AC and I-MRI, excessive intraoperative bleeding occurred in 2 patients (5%) who had I-MRI-guided craniotomy under GA, and 4 of 22 (18%) patients who underwent AC without I-MRI experienced neurological complications (seizures, motor deficits, and transient loss of consciousness). Eight patients (20%) who had I-MRI with GA had postoperative complications, largely neurological. The duration of surgery and anesthesia were shortest in the group of patients receiving AC without I-MRI. Seventy-three percent of the patients in this group had residual tumor postoperatively compared with 44% and 38% in those having I-MRI with AC or GA, respectively. Patients who underwent I-MRI-guided craniotomy with GA had the highest morbidity (8%) at hospital discharge.Conclusions: Our institutional experience suggests that AC under 3-Tesla I-MRI could be an option for glioma resection, although firm conclusions cannot be drawn given the limited and heterogenous nature of our data. Future multicenter trials comparing anesthetic and imaging modalities for glioma resection are recommended.