Yang-Hsin Shih1, David Hung-Chi Pan. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 201, Sec. 2, Shi-Pai Road, Taipei 112, Taiwan. yhshih@vghtpe.gov.tw
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although craniotomy is the preferred treatment for symptomatic solitary supratentorial cavernous malformation (CM), radiosurgery is also an option. Our aim was to see which of these strategies was the most effective and under what circumstances. METHODS: Of the 46 patients with solitary supratentorial CM that we retrospectively studied, 24 presented with seizures, 16 with focal neurological deficits due to intracerebral hemorrhage, and 6 with both seizures and bleeding. Sixteen were treated with craniotomy and 30 with gammaknife radiosurgery (GKRS). The main outcome measures for comparing craniotomy with GKRS were the proportion of postoperative seizure-free patients and the proportion of patients in whom no rebleeding occurred. RESULTS: Of patients presenting with seizures with/without bleeding, a significantly higher proportion of the craniotomy group than the GKRS group became and remained seizure-free (11/14 [79%] versus 4/16 [25%]; P < 0.002), and of those presenting with bleeding with/without seizures, a somewhat (though nonsignificantly) higher proportion did not rebleed (4/4 [100%] versus 12/18 [67%]) after surgery. The remaining 2 of the 16 craniotomy patients did not rebleed and had no residual tumor at follow up. Twelve of the 30 GKRS patients had evidence of tumor regression at follow up. CONCLUSION: In the clinical management of solitary supratentorial CM, craniotomy for lesionectomy resulted in better seizure control and rebleeding avoidance than GKRS.
OBJECTIVE: Although craniotomy is the preferred treatment for symptomatic solitary supratentorial cavernous malformation (CM), radiosurgery is also an option. Our aim was to see which of these strategies was the most effective and under what circumstances. METHODS: Of the 46 patients with solitary supratentorial CM that we retrospectively studied, 24 presented with seizures, 16 with focal neurological deficits due to intracerebral hemorrhage, and 6 with both seizures and bleeding. Sixteen were treated with craniotomy and 30 with gammaknife radiosurgery (GKRS). The main outcome measures for comparing craniotomy with GKRS were the proportion of postoperative seizure-freepatients and the proportion of patients in whom no rebleeding occurred. RESULTS: Of patients presenting with seizures with/without bleeding, a significantly higher proportion of the craniotomy group than the GKRS group became and remained seizure-free (11/14 [79%] versus 4/16 [25%]; P < 0.002), and of those presenting with bleeding with/without seizures, a somewhat (though nonsignificantly) higher proportion did not rebleed (4/4 [100%] versus 12/18 [67%]) after surgery. The remaining 2 of the 16 craniotomy patients did not rebleed and had no residual tumor at follow up. Twelve of the 30 GKRS patients had evidence of tumor regression at follow up. CONCLUSION: In the clinical management of solitary supratentorial CM, craniotomy for lesionectomy resulted in better seizure control and rebleeding avoidance than GKRS.