Literature DB >> 27903121

Craniopharyngioma adherence: a comprehensive topographical categorization and outcome-related risk stratification model based on the methodical examination of 500 tumors.

Ruth Prieto1, José María Pascual2, Maria Rosdolsky3, Inés Castro-Dufourny4, Rodrigo Carrasco5, Sewan Strauss6, Laura Barrios7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Craniopharyngioma (CP) adherence strongly influences the potential for achieving a radical and safe surgical treatment. However, this factor remains poorly addressed in the scientific literature. This study provides a rational, comprehensive description of CP adherence that can be used for the prediction of surgical risks associated with the removal of these challenging lesions. METHODS This study retrospectively analyzes the evidence provided in pathological, neuroradiological, and surgical CP reports concerning 3 components of the CP attachment: 1) the intracranial structures attached to the tumor; 2) the morphology of the adhesion; and 3) the adhesion strength. From a total of 1781 CP reports published between 1857 and 2016, a collection of 500 CPs providing the best information about the type of CP attachment were investigated. This cohort includes autopsy studies (n = 254); surgical studies with a detailed description or pictorial evidence of CP adherence (n = 298); and surgical CP videos (n = 61) showing the technical steps for releasing the attachment. A predictive model of CP adherence in hierarchical severity levels correlated with surgical outcomes was generated by multivariate analysis. RESULTS The anatomical location of the CP attachment occurred predominantly at the third ventricle floor (TVF) (54%, n = 268), third ventricle walls (23%, n = 114), and pituitary stalk (19%, n = 94). The optic chiasm was involved in 56% (n = 281). Six morphological patterns of CP attachment were identified: 1) fibrovascular pedicle (5.4%); 2) sessile or patch-like (21%); 3) cap-like (over the CP top, 14%); 4) bowl-like (around the CP bottom, 13.5%); 5) ring-like (encircling central band, 19%); and 6) circumferential (enveloping the entire CP, 27%). Adhesion strength was classified in 4 grades: 1) loose (easily dissectible, 8%); 2) tight (requires sharp dissection, 32%); 3) fusion (no clear cleavage plane, 40%); and 4) replacement (loss of brain tissue integrity, 20%). The types of CP attachment associated with the worst surgical outcomes are the ring-like, bowl-like, and circumferential ones with fusion to the TVF or replacement of this structure (p < 0.001). The CP topography is the variable that best predicts the type of CP attachment (p < 0.001). Ring-like and circumferential attachments were observed for CPs invading the TVF (secondary intraventricular CPs) and CPs developing within the TVF itself (infundibulo-tuberal CPs). Brain invasion and peritumoral gliosis occurred predominantly in the ring-like and circumferential adherence patterns (p < 0.001). A multivariate model including the variables CP topography, tumor consistency, and the presence of hydrocephalus, infundibulo-tuberal syndrome, and/or hypothalamic dysfunction accurately predicts the severity of CP attachment in 87% of cases. CONCLUSIONS A comprehensive descriptive model of CP adherence in 5 hierarchical levels of increased severity-mild, moderate, serious, severe, and critical-was generated. This model, based on the location, morphology, and strength of the attachment can be used to anticipate the surgical risk of hypothalamic injury and to plan the degree of removal accordingly.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3V = third ventricle; CHAID = chi-square automatic interaction detection; CP = craniopharyngioma; HICP = high intracranial pressure; PG = pituitary gland; PS = pituitary stalk; TVF = third ventricle floor; brain invasion; craniopharyngioma; gliosis; hypothalamus; pituitary gland; surgical outcome; third ventricle; tumor adherence

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27903121     DOI: 10.3171/2016.9.FOCUS16304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  24 in total

Review 1.  Can tissue biomarkers reliably predict the biological behavior of craniopharyngiomas? A comprehensive overview.

Authors:  Ruth Prieto; José M Pascual
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 4.107

2.  Predicting pituitary stalk position by in vivo visualization of the hypothalamo-hypophyseal tract in craniopharyngioma using diffusion tensor imaging tractography.

Authors:  Fuyu Wang; Jinli Jiang; Jiashu Zhang; Qun Wang
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 3.  Craniopharyngioma.

Authors:  Hermann L Müller; Thomas E Merchant; Monika Warmuth-Metz; Juan-Pedro Martinez-Barbera; Stephanie Puget
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 52.329

4.  Radiological and endocrinological evaluations with grading of hypothalamic perifocal edema caused by craniopharyngiomas.

Authors:  Yasuhiko Hayashi; Yasuo Sasagawa; Masahiro Oishi; Kouichi Misaki; Kazuto Kozaka; Osamu Tachibana; Mitsutoshi Nakada
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 4.107

5.  Topographic Diagnosis of Craniopharyngiomas: The Accuracy of MRI Findings Observed on Conventional T1 and T2 Images.

Authors:  R Prieto; J M Pascual; L Barrios
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 6.  Strictly third ventricle craniopharyngiomas: pathological verification, anatomo-clinical characterization and surgical results from a comprehensive overview of 245 cases.

Authors:  Ruth Prieto; Laura Barrios; José M Pascual
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 7.  Update on management of craniopharyngiomas.

Authors:  Fraser Henderson; Theodore H Schwartz
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Exploring the pathological relationships between adamantinomatous craniopharyngioma and contiguous structures with tumor origin.

Authors:  Shaoyang Li; Bowen Wu; Yingqun Xiao; Jie Wu; Le Yang; Chenxing Yang; Zhongjian Huang; Chengbin Pan; Minde Li; Youqing Yang; Bin Tang; Shenhao Xie; Xiao Wu; Suyue Zheng; Chunliang Wang; Tao Hong
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 4.506

Review 9.  Craniopharyngioma adherence: a reappraisal of the evidence.

Authors:  Ruth Prieto; José María Pascual; Verena Hofecker; Eduard Winter; Inés Castro-Dufourny; Rodrigo Carrasco; Laura Barrios
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 3.042

10.  BRAF V600E mutant papillary craniopharyngiomas: a single-institutional case series.

Authors:  Emanuele La Corte; Iyan Younus; Francesca Pivari; Adelina Selimi; Malte Ottenhausen; Jonathan A Forbes; David J Pisapia; Georgiana A Dobri; Vijay K Anand; Theodore H Schwartz
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 4.107

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.