2017
DOI: 10.3171/2016.7.jns161236
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Editorial: Vestibular schwannoma radiosurgery: progression or pseudoprogression?

Abstract: FIG. 1. Chart showing comparative evolution of the average total tumor volume (in mm) in percentage of the volume at the time of radiosurgery.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
1
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
22
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Patients with <20% increase in tumor volume relative to the BTV at each time interval were considered radiologic responders, those with a ≥20% increase relative to their BTV were radiologic non-responders, and those who required salvage microsurgery were treatment failures. Given the paucity of evidence regarding measures of volumetric response, we reviewed the literature, and on the basis of our clinical judgment, we decided upon a volumetric threshold of 20% above BTVs, which we felt was a conservative estimate to distinguish between progression, the error inherent in estimating volumetric changes using simple tri-dimensional measurements, and pseudoprogression ( 24 , 25 ). If a patient did not have imaging within a particular time interval, they were excluded from the analysis within that time interval.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients with <20% increase in tumor volume relative to the BTV at each time interval were considered radiologic responders, those with a ≥20% increase relative to their BTV were radiologic non-responders, and those who required salvage microsurgery were treatment failures. Given the paucity of evidence regarding measures of volumetric response, we reviewed the literature, and on the basis of our clinical judgment, we decided upon a volumetric threshold of 20% above BTVs, which we felt was a conservative estimate to distinguish between progression, the error inherent in estimating volumetric changes using simple tri-dimensional measurements, and pseudoprogression ( 24 , 25 ). If a patient did not have imaging within a particular time interval, they were excluded from the analysis within that time interval.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reported outcome of large series of centers of high experience and expertise for SRS, facial nerve functional degradation after GKRS, has become anecdotal due to the introduction of robotization. 8,40 Notably, a progressive rate of facial nerve recovery at long-term follow-up following SRS has been shown, compared with the postoperative period, 20,34,50 emphasizing the importance of a long-term evaluation to assess the outcome after adequate tumor shrinkage following SRS. 4…”
Section: Facial Nerve Outcomementioning
confidence: 99%
“…48 The recurrence rate of large VSs after total microsurgical removal is reported to be between 4% and 27% 1,21,25,27,45 and is up to 53% after an STR. 13,22,23,39 The post-GKRS tumor growth control rate has been reported to be as high as 98% 40 in the literature, and a pooled overall tumor control rate of 92.7% was reported in a recent meta-analysis that included more than 3233 patients and a mean follow-up period of 51.24 months. 42 In our analysis, 18 patients (7.3%) had tumor progression, 5 of whom were observed and remained stable over time without any further treatment.…”
Section: Tumor Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As illustrated in the literature, the decision whether to continue to wait-and-scan or to act by a new therapeutic mean is always a clinical decision and "never just a matter of volume measurements." [8][9][10] Four patients in this series needed a ventriculoperitoneal shunt for persistent hydrocephalus.…”
Section: Tumor Control After Combined Approachmentioning
confidence: 91%