PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the control rate of vestibular schwannomas (VS) after treatment with linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or radiotherapy (SRT) by using a validated volumetric measuring tool. Volume-based studies on prognosis after LINAC-based SRS or SRT for VS are reported scarcely. In addition, growth patterns and risk factors predicting treatment failure were analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, 37 VS patients treated with LINAC based SRS or SRT were analyzed. Baseline and follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans were analyzed with volume measurements on contrast enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Absence of intervention after radiotherapy was defined as "no additional intervention group, " absence of radiological growth was defined as "radiological control group. " Significant growth was defined as a volume change of 19.7% or more, as calculated in a previous study. RESULTS: The cumulative 4-year probability of no additional intervention was 96.4% ± 0.03; the 4-year radiological control probability was 85.4% ± 0.1). The median follow-up was 40 months. Overall, shrinkage was seen in 65%, stable VS in 22%, and growth in 13%. In 54% of all patients, transient swelling was observed. No prognostic factors were found regarding VS growth. Previous treatment and SRS were associated with transient swelling significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Good control rates are reported for LINAC based SRS or SRT in VS, in which the lower rate of radiological growth control is attributed to the use of the more sensitive volume measurements. Transient swelling after radiosurgery is a common phenomenon and should not be mistaken for treatment failure. Previous treatment and SRS were significantly associated with transient swelling.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the control rate of vestibular schwannomas (VS) after treatment with linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or radiotherapy (SRT) by using a validated volumetric measuring tool. Volume-based studies on prognosis after LINAC-based SRS or SRT for VS are reported scarcely. In addition, growth patterns and risk factors predicting treatment failure were analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, 37 VS patients treated with LINAC based SRS or SRT were analyzed. Baseline and follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans were analyzed with volume measurements on contrast enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Absence of intervention after radiotherapy was defined as "no additional intervention group, " absence of radiological growth was defined as "radiological control group. " Significant growth was defined as a volume change of 19.7% or more, as calculated in a previous study. RESULTS: The cumulative 4-year probability of no additional intervention was 96.4% ± 0.03; the 4-year radiological control probability was 85.4% ± 0.1). The median follow-up was 40 months. Overall, shrinkage was seen in 65%, stable VS in 22%, and growth in 13%. In 54% of all patients, transient swelling was observed. No prognostic factors were found regarding VS growth. Previous treatment and SRS were associated with transient swelling significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Good control rates are reported for LINAC based SRS or SRT in VS, in which the lower rate of radiological growth control is attributed to the use of the more sensitive volume measurements. Transient swelling after radiosurgery is a common phenomenon and should not be mistaken for treatment failure. Previous treatment and SRS were significantly associated with transient swelling.
Authors: Mohamed H Khattab; Neil B Newman; David M Wharton; Alexander D Sherry; Guozhen Luo; Nauman F Manzoor; Alejandro Rivas; L Taylor Davis; Lola B Chambless; Albert Attia; Anthony J Cmelak Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2019-06-12
Authors: Myreille D'Astous; Allen L Ho; Arjun Pendharkar; Clara Y H Choi; Scott G Soltys; Iris C Gibbs; Armine T Tayag; Patricia A Thompson; John R Adler; Steven D Chang Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Michael Huo; Heath Foley; Mark Pinkham; Mihir Shanker; Anne Bernard; Michael Jenkins; Sarah Olson; Bruce Hall; Trevor Watkins; Catherine Jones; Matthew Foote Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2020
Authors: Jagdeep Singh Virk; Sonal Tripathi; Premjit S Randhawa; Elijah A Kwasa; Nigel D Mendoza; Jonathan Harcourt Journal: Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2014-03-25
Authors: Scott G Soltys; Michael T Milano; Jinyu Xue; Wolfgang A Tomé; Ellen Yorke; Jason Sheehan; George X Ding; John P Kirkpatrick; Lijun Ma; Arjun Sahgal; Timothy Solberg; John Adler; Jimm Grimm; Issam El Naqa Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-12-26 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Dilek Hacer Cesme; Alpay Alkan; Mehmet Ali Gultekin; Lutfullah Sari; Gokberk Alkan; Mehmet Hakan Seyithanoglu; Mustafa Aziz Hatiboglu Journal: Medeni Med J Date: 2021-03-26
Authors: Patrick P J H Langenhuizen; Sander H P Sebregts; Svetlana Zinger; Sieger Leenstra; Jeroen B Verheul; Peter H N de With Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Kathryn R Fega; Geoffrey P Fletcher; Mark R Waddle; Jennifer L Peterson; Jonathan B Ashman; David M Barrs; Bernard R Bendok; Naresh P Patel; Alyx B Porter; Sujay A Vora Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-08-23