| Literature DB >> 33145209 |
Rahul Singh1, Ravi Shankar Prasad1, Ashvamedh Singh1.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Cerebellopontine angle (CPA) epidermoids are essentially benign tumors, and treatment is complete surgical excision. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical perspective and outcome analysis of CPA epidermoids. SETTINGS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Cerebellopontine angle epidermoid; gross-total resection; intracranial epidermoid; outcome analysis; retrosigmoid approach; subtotal resection
Year: 2020 PMID: 33145209 PMCID: PMC7591210 DOI: 10.4103/ajns.AJNS_226_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian J Neurosurg
Figure 1H and E staining (4X) cerebellopontine angle epidermoid. A: Keratin flakes and B: Stratified squamous epithelium
Figure 2Magnetic resonance imaging of a patient with cerebellopontine angle epidermoid. (a) Axial T1 (showing a well-defined extra-axial hypointense cystic lesion in the left cerebellopontine angle region causing mass effect over the brain stem and cerebellum), (b) Axial T2 (the lesion is hyperintense on T2 showing near cerebrospinal fluid intensity), (c) Axial fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (the lesion shows incomplete suppression on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery with dirty heterogeneous signal), (d) Axial apparent diffusion coefficient (low signal on apparent diffusion coefficient confirms true restriction predominantly in the central region), and (e) Axial diffusion-weighted imaging (the lesion shows bright signal representing a combination of diffusion restriction and T2 shine through) magnetic resonance imaging sequences
Clinical presentation of cerebellopontine angle epidermoid (n=15)
| Number of patients (%) | |
|---|---|
| Symptoms | |
| Facial and eyelid muscle weakness/paralysis | 9 (60) |
| Loss of hearing | 10 (67.7) |
| Tinnitus | 6 (40) |
| Vertigo | 6 (40) |
| Imbalance | 7 (46.7) |
| Wasting of muscles of mastication | 3 (20) |
| Trigeminal neuralgia | 7 (46.7) |
| Diplopia | 2 (13.3) |
| Symptoms of raised ICT | 5 (33.3) |
| Signs | |
| Cranial nerve V involvement | 7 (46.7) |
| Cranial nerve VII involvement | 9 (60) |
| Cranial nerve VIII involvement | 10 (67.7) |
| Cranial nerve IV involvement | 1 (6.7) |
| Cranial nerve VI involvement | 1 (6.7) |
| Lower cranial nerve involvement | 3 (20) |
| Cerebellar signs | 12 (80) |
| Signs of raised ICT | 5 (33.3) |
ICT – Intracranial tension
Surgical management
| Surgical approach and management | Number of patients (%) |
|---|---|
| MPVP shunt before surgery | 2 (13.3) |
| Retrosigmoid approach | 12 (80) |
| Combined middle cranial fossa and retrosigmoid approach | 3 (20) |
| Gross-total resection (with capsular resection) | 13 (86.7) |
| Subtotal resection (with capsular remnant) | 2 (13.3) |
MPVP – Medium pressure ventriculoperitoneal
Operative outcome and follow-up results in epidermoids
| Surgical approach | Postoperative outcome | Follow-up results | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good | Deficit | Death | Mean follow-up duration (months) | Recurrence | |
| Retrosigmoid (12) | |||||
| GTR | 9 | 2 | 0 | 7.2 | 0 |
| STR | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Combined approach (3) | |||||
| GTR | 2 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 |
| STR | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Preoperative shunting | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 |
STR – Subtotal resection; GTR – Gross-total resection
Postoperative outcome and resectability analysis
| Outcome | GTR ( | STR ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Persisting cranial nerve deficit | 2 | 2 | 0.0118* |
| New cranial nerve deficit | 1 | 0 | 0.6847 |
| Tumor progression | 0 | 0 | NS |
| Regional complications | 2 | 1 | 0.2546 |
| Systemic complications | 2 | 0 | 0.5513 |
| Cranial nerve recovery | |||
| V (7) | 7 (100) | 0 | |
| IV (1) | 1 (100) | 0 | |
| VI (1) | 1 (100) | 0 | |
| VII (9) | 6 (66.7) | 0 (0) | 0.0233* |
| VIII (10) | 7 (70) | 0 (0) | 0.0157* |
* - Significant (P<0.05). STR – Subtotal resection; GTR – Gross-total resection; NS – Not significant
Mean duration of recovery
| Cranial nerve | Mean duration of recovery |
|---|---|
| V | 7.4 days |
| VII | 1.1 months |
| VIII | 6.2 months |