Literature DB >> 21314270

Quality of life in patients with intracranial gliomas: the impact of modern image-guided surgery.

Asgeir S Jakola1, Geirmund Unsgård, Ole Solheim.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Outcome following brain tumor operations is often assessed by health professionals using various gross function scales. However, surprisingly little is known about how modern glioma surgery affects quality of life (QOL) as reported by the patients themselves. In the present study the authors aimed to assess changes in QOL after glioma surgery, to explore the relationship between QOL and traditional outcome parameters, and to examine possible predictors of change in QOL.
METHODS: Eighty-eight patients with glioma were recruited from among those 16 years or older who had been admitted to the authors' department for brain tumor surgery in the period between January 2007 and December 2009. A 3D ultrasonography-based navigation system was utilized in nearly all operations and functional MR imaging data on eloquent lesions were incorporated into the neuronavigation system. Preoperative scores for QOL (EuroQol 5D [EQ-5D]) and functional status (Karnofsky Performance Scale [KPS]) were obtained. The EQ-5D and KPS scores were subsequently recorded 6 weeks postoperatively, as were responses to a structured interview about new deficits and possible complications.
RESULTS: There was no change in the median EQ-5D indexes following surgery, 0.76 versus 0.75 (p = 0.419). The EQ-5D index value was significantly correlated with the KPS score (p < 0.001; rho = 0.769). The EQ-5D index values and KPS scores improved in 35.2% and 24.1% of cases, were equal in 20.5% and 47.2% of cases, and deteriorated in 44.3% and 28.7%, respectively. Thus, both improvement and deterioration were underestimated by the KPS score as compared with the patient-reported QOL assessment. New motor deficits (p = 0.003), new language deficits (p = 0.035), new unsteadiness and/or ataxia (p = 0.001), occipital lesions (p = 0.019), and no use of ultrasonography for resection control (p = 0.021) were independent predictors of worsening QOL in a multivariate model.
CONCLUSIONS: The surgical procedures per se may not significantly alter QOL in the average patient with glioma; however, new deficits have a major undesirable effect on QOL. It seems that the active use of intraoperative ultrasonography may be associated with a preservation of QOL. The EQ-5D seems like a good outcome measure with a strong correlation to traditional variables while offering a more detailed description of outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21314270     DOI: 10.3171/2011.1.JNS101657

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  34 in total

1.  The patients' view: impact of the extent of resection, intraoperative imaging, and awake surgery on health-related quality of life in high-grade glioma patients-results of a multicenter cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Katrin Nickel; Mirjam Renovanz; Jochem König; Linda Stöckelmaier; Anne-Katrin Hickmann; Minou Nadji-Ohl; Jens Engelke; Elke Weimann; Dirk Freudenstein; Oliver Ganslandt; Lars Bullinger; Christian Rainer Wirtz; Jan Coburger
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2017-03-06       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  The relative value of postoperative versus preoperative Karnofsky Performance Scale scores as a predictor of survival after surgical resection of glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  Lola B Chambless; Heather M Kistka; Scott L Parker; Laila Hassam-Malani; Matthew J McGirt; Reid C Thompson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2014-10-26       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Quality-adjusted life years in glioma patients: a systematic review on currently available data and the lack of evidence-based utilities.

Authors:  Vicki Marie Butenschoen; Anna Kelm; Bernhard Meyer; Sandro M Krieg
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 4.130

4.  Quality of life assessed with EQ-5D in patients undergoing glioma surgery: what is the responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference?

Authors:  Lisa Millgård Sagberg; Asgeir S Jakola; Ole Solheim
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-12-07       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Intraoperative imaging techniques for glioma surgery.

Authors:  Tomas Garzon-Muvdi; Carmen Kut; Xingde Li; Kaisorn L Chaichana
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 3.404

Review 6.  Factors influencing quality of life in adult patients with primary brain tumors.

Authors:  Rakesh Jalali; Debnarayan Dutta
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 12.300

Review 7.  Reporting of patient-reported health-related quality of life in adults with diffuse low-grade glioma: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniel M Fountain; Dominic Allen; Alexis J Joannides; Dipankar Nandi; Thomas Santarius; Aswin Chari
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 12.300

8.  The influence of surgery on quality of life in patients with intracranial meningiomas: a prospective study.

Authors:  Asgeir S Jakola; Michel Gulati; Sasha Gulati; Ole Solheim
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  Influence of Residual Disease Following Surgical Resection in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma on Clinical, Neurocognitive, and Patient Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  William A Hall; Stephanie L Pugh; Jeffrey S Wefel; Terri S Armstrong; Mark R Gilbert; David G Brachman; Maria Werner-Wasik; Merideth M Wendland; Paul D Brown; Samuel T Chao; Kevin S Roof; H Ian Robins; Minesh P Mehta; Walter J Curran; Benjamin Movsas
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Relationship between symptom burden and health status: analysis of the MDASI-BT and EQ-5D.

Authors:  Elizabeth Vera; Alvina A Acquaye; Tito R Mendoza; Mark R Gilbert; Terri S Armstrong
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2017-07-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.