Chiung-Chyi Shen1, Weir-Chiang You2, Ming-Hsi Sun1, Shinh-Dung Lee1, Hsi-Kai Tsou1, Yen-Ju Chen1, Meei-Ling Sheu3, Jason Sheehan4, Hung-Chuan Pan5,6. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sec. 4, 40705, Taichung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 3. Institute of Biomedical Science, National Chung-Hsin University, Taichung, Taiwan. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, 1650 Taiwan Boulevard Sec. 4, 40705, Taichung, Taiwan. hcpan2003@yahoo.com.tw. 6. Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan. hcpan2003@yahoo.com.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gamma knife treatment outcome of large pituitary tumors which are only partially irradiated secondary to immediate proximity to critical structures such as the optic apparatus have not been rigorously studied. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2003 to December 2013, there were 41 cases of recurrent or residual nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenoma partially treated with gamma knife radiosurgery (GKRS) because the adenoma obscured part of the optic apparatus on planning SRS MR imaging. RESULTS: The follow up period after GKRS was 92.3 ± 5.6 months. The percentage of tumor coverage with the full dose was 88.5 ± 0.7%. Five of 43 (11.6%) patients experienced a transient visional decrease and one patient experienced a permanent visual field defect. During the follow up, two patients underwent transphenoidal surgery and one patient had a craniotomy due to tumor progression. Seven patients (16.2%) developed cortisol and thyroxine deficiencies. In multiple variant analyses, transient visual decline was correlated to the tumor volume (> 3.5 cc), percentage of tumor coverage (< 90%), the distance from the optic apparatus to the pituitary stalk (> 15 mm) and percentage of tumor above the orbital apex (65%). CONCLUSION: In the limited case of this cohort, we found that partially treated pituitary nonfunctioning macroadenoma yielded a high tumor control rate. However, visual decline as a result of tumor progression or radiation effect can occur in a minority of patients. The radiosurgical technique warrants further study to better define the long-term risk to benefit profile for its use in complex pituitary macroadenoma obscuring part of the optic apparatus.
BACKGROUND: Gamma knife treatment outcome of large pituitary tumors which are only partially irradiated secondary to immediate proximity to critical structures such as the optic apparatus have not been rigorously studied. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2003 to December 2013, there were 41 cases of recurrent or residual nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenoma partially treated with gamma knife radiosurgery (GKRS) because the adenoma obscured part of the optic apparatus on planning SRS MR imaging. RESULTS: The follow up period after GKRS was 92.3 ± 5.6 months. The percentage of tumor coverage with the full dose was 88.5 ± 0.7%. Five of 43 (11.6%) patients experienced a transient visional decrease and one patient experienced a permanent visual field defect. During the follow up, two patients underwent transphenoidal surgery and one patient had a craniotomy due to tumor progression. Seven patients (16.2%) developed cortisol and thyroxine deficiencies. In multiple variant analyses, transient visual decline was correlated to the tumor volume (> 3.5 cc), percentage of tumor coverage (< 90%), the distance from the optic apparatus to the pituitary stalk (> 15 mm) and percentage of tumor above the orbital apex (65%). CONCLUSION: In the limited case of this cohort, we found that partially treated pituitary nonfunctioning macroadenoma yielded a high tumor control rate. However, visual decline as a result of tumor progression or radiation effect can occur in a minority of patients. The radiosurgical technique warrants further study to better define the long-term risk to benefit profile for its use in complex pituitary macroadenoma obscuring part of the optic apparatus.
Authors: Jackson A Gondim; João Paulo C Almeida; Lucas Alverne F Albuquerque; Erika F Gomes; Michele Schops Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Joshua William Lucas; Mary E Bodach; Luis M Tumialan; Nelson M Oyesiku; Chirag G Patil; Zachary Litvack; Manish K Aghi; Gabriel Zada Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Douglas Kondziolka; Samuel M Shin; Andrew Brunswick; Irene Kim; Joshua S Silverman Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-09-28 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Kyung-Jae Park; Hideyuki Kano; Phillip V Parry; Ajay Niranjan; John C Flickinger; L Dade Lunsford; Douglas Kondziolka Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Shereen Ezzat; Sylvia L Asa; William T Couldwell; Charles E Barr; William E Dodge; Mary Lee Vance; Ian E McCutcheon Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: I Jonathan Pomeraniec; Hideyuki Kano; Zhiyuan Xu; Brandon Nguyen; Zaid A Siddiqui; Danilo Silva; Mayur Sharma; Hesham Radwan; Jonathan A Cohen; Robert F Dallapiazza; Christian Iorio-Morin; Amparo Wolf; John A Jane; Inga S Grills; David Mathieu; Douglas Kondziolka; Cheng-Chia Lee; Chih-Chun Wu; Christopher P Cifarelli; Tomas Chytka; Gene H Barnett; L Dade Lunsford; Jason P Sheehan Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2017-10-27 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Aasim N Maldar; Sanjeev Pattankar; Basant K Misra; Phulrenu H Chauhan; Milind Sankhe; Ketan Desai; N F Shah Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 4.130