Acta neurochirurgica · 2019
Awake craniotomy versus craniotomy under general anesthesia without surgery adjuncts for supratentorial glioblastoma in eloquent areas: a retrospective matched case-control study.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gerritsen Jasper Kees Wim, Viëtor Charlotte Lauren, Rizopoulos Dimitris, Schouten Joost Willem, Klimek Markus, Dirven Clemens Maria Franciscus, Vincent Arnaud Jean-Pierre Edouard
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Awake craniotomy with electrocortical and subcortical mapping (AC) has become the mainstay of surgical treatment of supratentorial low-grade gliomas in eloquent areas, but not as much for glioblastomas.
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective controlled-matched study aims to determine whether AC increases gross total resections (GTR) and decreases neurological morbidity in glioblastoma patients as compared to resection under general anesthesia (GA, conventional).
METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with glioblastoma undergoing AC were 1:3 controlled-matched with 111 patients undergoing GA for glioblastoma resection. The two groups were matched for age, gender, preoperative Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), preoperative tumor volume, tumor location, and type of adjuvant treatment. Primary outcomes were extent of resection and the rate of postoperative complications. The secondary outcome was overall postoperative survival.
RESULTS: After matching, there were no significant differences in clinical variables between groups. Extent of resection was significantly higher in the AC group: mean extent of resection in the AC group was 94.89% (SD = 10.57) as compared to 70.30% (SD = 28.37) in the GA group (p = 0.0001). Furthermore, the mean rate of late minor postoperative complications in the AC group (0.03; SD = - 0.16) was significantly lower than in the GA group (0.15; SD = 0.39) (p = 0.05). No significant differences between groups were found for the other subgroups of postoperative complications. Moreover, overall postoperative survival did not differ between groups (p = 0.297).
CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that resection of glioblastoma using AC is associated with significantly greater extent of resection and less late minor postoperative complications as compared with craniotomy under GA without the use of surgery adjuncts. However, due to certain limitations inherent to our study design (selection bias) and the absence of the use of surgery adjuncts in the GA group, we advocate for a prospective study to further build upon this evidence and study the use of AC in glioblastoma patients.
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective controlled-matched study aims to determine whether AC increases gross total resections (GTR) and decreases neurological morbidity in glioblastoma patients as compared to resection under general anesthesia (GA, conventional).
METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with glioblastoma undergoing AC were 1:3 controlled-matched with 111 patients undergoing GA for glioblastoma resection. The two groups were matched for age, gender, preoperative Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), preoperative tumor volume, tumor location, and type of adjuvant treatment. Primary outcomes were extent of resection and the rate of postoperative complications. The secondary outcome was overall postoperative survival.
RESULTS: After matching, there were no significant differences in clinical variables between groups. Extent of resection was significantly higher in the AC group: mean extent of resection in the AC group was 94.89% (SD = 10.57) as compared to 70.30% (SD = 28.37) in the GA group (p = 0.0001). Furthermore, the mean rate of late minor postoperative complications in the AC group (0.03; SD = - 0.16) was significantly lower than in the GA group (0.15; SD = 0.39) (p = 0.05). No significant differences between groups were found for the other subgroups of postoperative complications. Moreover, overall postoperative survival did not differ between groups (p = 0.297).
CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that resection of glioblastoma using AC is associated with significantly greater extent of resection and less late minor postoperative complications as compared with craniotomy under GA without the use of surgery adjuncts. However, due to certain limitations inherent to our study design (selection bias) and the absence of the use of surgery adjuncts in the GA group, we advocate for a prospective study to further build upon this evidence and study the use of AC in glioblastoma patients.