Christopher S Hong1, Di Deng1, Alberto Vera1, Veronica L Chiang2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA. veronica.chiang@yale.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Many publications report laser-interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) as a viable alternative treatment to craniotomy for radiation necrosis (RN) and re-growing tumor occurring after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases. No studies to-date have compared the two options. The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare outcomes after LITT versus craniotomy for regrowing lesions in patients previously treated with SRS for brain metastases. METHODS: Data were collected from a single-institution chart review of patients treated with LITT or craniotomy for previously irradiated brain metastasis. RESULTS: Of 75 patients, 42 had recurrent tumor (56%) and 33 (44%) had RN. Of patients with tumor, 26 underwent craniotomy and 16 LITT. For RN, 15 had craniotomy and 18 LITT. There was no significant difference between LITT and craniotomy in ability to taper off steroids or neurological outcomes. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar for LITT versus craniotomy, respectively: %PFS-survival at 1-year = 72.2% versus 61.1%, %PFS-survival at 2-years = 60.0% versus 61.1%, p = 0.72; %OS-survival at 1-year = 69.0% versus 69.3%, %OS-survival at 2-years = 56.6% versus 49.5%, p = 0.90. Craniotomy resulted in higher rates of pre-operative deficit improvement than LITT (p < 0.01). On subgroup analysis, the single factor most significantly associated with OS and PFS was pathology of the lesion. About 40% of tumor lesions needed post-operative salvage with radiation after both craniotomy and LITT. CONCLUSIONS: LITT was as efficacious as craniotomy in achieving local control of recurrent irradiated brain metastases and facilitating steroid taper, regardless of pathology. Craniotomy appears to be more advantageous for providing symptom relief in those with pre-operative symptoms.
PURPOSE: Many publications report laser-interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) as a viable alternative treatment to craniotomy for radiation necrosis (RN) and re-growing tumor occurring after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases. No studies to-date have compared the two options. The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare outcomes after LITT versus craniotomy for regrowing lesions in patients previously treated with SRS for brain metastases. METHODS: Data were collected from a single-institution chart review of patients treated with LITT or craniotomy for previously irradiated brain metastasis. RESULTS: Of 75 patients, 42 had recurrent tumor (56%) and 33 (44%) had RN. Of patients with tumor, 26 underwent craniotomy and 16 LITT. For RN, 15 had craniotomy and 18 LITT. There was no significant difference between LITT and craniotomy in ability to taper off steroids or neurological outcomes. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar for LITT versus craniotomy, respectively: %PFS-survival at 1-year = 72.2% versus 61.1%, %PFS-survival at 2-years = 60.0% versus 61.1%, p = 0.72; %OS-survival at 1-year = 69.0% versus 69.3%, %OS-survival at 2-years = 56.6% versus 49.5%, p = 0.90. Craniotomy resulted in higher rates of pre-operative deficit improvement than LITT (p < 0.01). On subgroup analysis, the single factor most significantly associated with OS and PFS was pathology of the lesion. About 40% of tumor lesions needed post-operative salvage with radiation after both craniotomy and LITT. CONCLUSIONS: LITT was as efficacious as craniotomy in achieving local control of recurrent irradiated brain metastases and facilitating steroid taper, regardless of pathology. Craniotomy appears to be more advantageous for providing symptom relief in those with pre-operative symptoms.
Authors: Nanthiya Sujijantarat; Christopher S Hong; Kent A Owusu; Aladine A Elsamadicy; Joseph P Antonios; Andrew B Koo; Joachim M Baehring; Veronica L Chiang Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Matthew M Grabowski; Ethan S Srinivasan; Eugene J Vaios; Eric W Sankey; Balint Otvos; Daria Krivosheya; Alex Scott; Michael Olufawo; Jun Ma; Elena I Fomchenko; James E Herndon; Albert H Kim; Veronica L Chiang; Clark C Chen; Eric C Leuthardt; Gene H Barnett; John P Kirkpatrick; Alireza M Mohammadi; Peter E Fecci Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2022-06-02
Authors: Georgios P Skandalakis; Daniel R Rivera; Caroline D Rizea; Alexandros Bouras; Joe Gerald Jesu Raj; Dominique Bozec; Constantinos G Hadjipanayis Journal: Int J Hyperthermia Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.914
Authors: David C Soler; Amber Kerstetter-Fogle; Theresa Elder; Alankrita Raghavan; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Kevin D Cooper; Thomas S McCormick; Andrew E Sloan Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-12-15 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Paolo Palmisciano; Ali S Haider; Chibueze D Nwagwu; Waseem Wahood; Salah G Aoun; Kalil G Abdullah; Tarek Y El Ahmadieh Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-07-03 Impact factor: 4.130