Olutayo Ibukunolu Olubiyi1, Aysegul Ozdemir2, Fatih Incekara3, Yanmei Tie4, Parviz Dolati4, Liangge Hsu5, Sandro Santagata6, Zhenrui Chen7, Laura Rigolo4, Alexandra J Golby8. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: oolubiyi@partners.org. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Cad. Fatih, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, Netherlands. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 7. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Jinling Hospital, Southern Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 8. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (IoMRI) was devised to overcome brain shifts during craniotomies. Yet, the acceptance of IoMRI is limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate impact of IoMRI on intracranial glioma resection outcome including overall patient survival. METHODS: A retrospective review of records was performed on a cohort of 164 consecutive patients who underwent resection surgery for newly diagnosed intracranial gliomas either with or without IoMRI technology performed by 2 neurosurgeons in our center. Patient follow-up was at least 5 years. Extent of resection (EOR) was calculated using pre- and postoperative contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR-images. Adjusted analysis was performed to compare gross total resection (GTR), EOR, permanent surgery-associated neurologic deficit, and overall survival between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Overall median EOR was 92.1%, and 97.45% with IoMRI use and 89.9% without IoMRI, with crude (unadjusted) P < 0.005. GTR was achieved in 49.3% of IoMRI cases, versus in only 21.4% of no-IoMRI cases, P < 0.001. GTR achieved was more with the use of IoMRI among gliomas located in both eloquent and noneloquent brain areas, P = 0.017 and <0.001, respectively. Permanent surgery-associated neurologic deficit was not (statistically) more significant with no-IoMRI, P = 0.284 (13.8% vs. 6.7%). In addition, the IoMRI group had better 5-year overall survival, P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the use of IoMRI was associated with greater rates of EOR and GTR, and better overall 5-year survival in both eloquent brain areas located and non-eloquent brain areas located gliomas, with no increased risk of neurologic complication.
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (IoMRI) was devised to overcome brain shifts during craniotomies. Yet, the acceptance of IoMRI is limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate impact of IoMRI on intracranial glioma resection outcome including overall patient survival. METHODS: A retrospective review of records was performed on a cohort of 164 consecutive patients who underwent resection surgery for newly diagnosed intracranial gliomas either with or without IoMRI technology performed by 2 neurosurgeons in our center. Patient follow-up was at least 5 years. Extent of resection (EOR) was calculated using pre- and postoperative contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR-images. Adjusted analysis was performed to compare gross total resection (GTR), EOR, permanent surgery-associated neurologic deficit, and overall survival between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Overall median EOR was 92.1%, and 97.45% with IoMRI use and 89.9% without IoMRI, with crude (unadjusted) P < 0.005. GTR was achieved in 49.3% of IoMRI cases, versus in only 21.4% of no-IoMRI cases, P < 0.001. GTR achieved was more with the use of IoMRI among gliomas located in both eloquent and noneloquent brain areas, P = 0.017 and <0.001, respectively. Permanent surgery-associated neurologic deficit was not (statistically) more significant with no-IoMRI, P = 0.284 (13.8% vs. 6.7%). In addition, the IoMRI group had better 5-year overall survival, P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the use of IoMRI was associated with greater rates of EOR and GTR, and better overall 5-year survival in both eloquent brain areas located and non-eloquent brain areas located gliomas, with no increased risk of neurologic complication.
Authors: D T Gering; A Nabavi; R Kikinis; N Hata; L J O'Donnell; W E Grimson; F A Jolesz; P M Black; W M Wells Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Eric C Leuthardt; Chris C H Lim; Manish N Shah; John A Evans; Keith M Rich; Ralph G Dacey; Rene Tempelhoff; Michael R Chicoine Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Hiroaki Wakimoto; Shota Tanaka; William T Curry; Franziska Loebel; Dan Zhao; Kensuke Tateishi; Juxiang Chen; Lindsay K Klofas; Nina Lelic; James C Kim; Dora Dias-Santagata; Leif W Ellisen; Darrell R Borger; Sarah-Maria Fendt; Matthew G Vander Heiden; Tracy T Batchelor; A John Iafrate; Daniel P Cahill; Andrew S Chi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Susumu Mori; Kim Frederiksen; Peter C M van Zijl; Bram Stieltjes; Michael A Kraut; Meiyappan Solaiyappan; Martin G Pomper Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Kenneth B Fallon; Cheryl A Palmer; Kevin A Roth; L Burton Nabors; Wenquan Wang; Mark Carpenter; Ruma Banerjee; Peter Forsyth; Keith Rich; Arie Perry Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Mustafa Aziz Hatiboglu; Jeffrey S Weinberg; Dima Suki; Ganesh Rao; Sujit S Prabhu; Komal Shah; Ed Jackson; Raymond Sawaya Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Christian Senft; Kea Franz; Christian T Ulrich; Andrea Bink; Andrea Szelényi; Thomas Gasser; Volker Seifert Journal: Clin Neurol Neurosurg Date: 2009-12-24 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: Nityanand Miskin; Prashin Unadkat; Michael E Carlton; Alexandra J Golby; Geoffrey S Young; Raymond Y Huang Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Rahul Sastry; Wenya Linda Bi; Steve Pieper; Sarah Frisken; Tina Kapur; William Wells; Alexandra J Golby Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Willemieke S Tummers; Juergen K Willmann; Bert A Bonsing; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg Journal: Pancreas Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Tumul Chowdhury; Frederick A Zeiler; Gyaninder P Singh; Abseret Hailu; Hal Loewen; Bernhard Schaller; Ronald B Cappellani; Michael West Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 6.244