World neurosurgery · 2023
Comparison of Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Hypofractionated Radiosurgery for Vestibular Schwannomas: A Meta-Analysis of Available Literature.
МетаанализСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Sharma Mayur, Papisetty Saikarthik, Dhawan Sanjay, Ahluwalia Manmeet S, Venteicher Andrew S, Chen Clark C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and recently, hypofractionated radiosurgery (hSRS) are increasingly utilized as treatment for vestibular schwannomas (VS). We performed a meta-analysis of literature comparing these modalities.
METHODS: The PubMed database of articles was searched for studies that compared SRS and hSRS in patients with VS. Variables analyzed include tumor control, hearing preservation, facial nerve preservation, trigeminal nerve preservation, and total complications. Heterogeneity across the studies was gauged using Higgins's inconsistency index. Funnel plots and Egger's regression intercept test were used to address the publication bias.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies that satisfied the search criteria were selected for meta-analysis. The studies identified in our study included 353 SRS and 511 hSRS-treated patients. Analysis of heterogeneity showed that hSRS is employed for relatively larger tumor sizes in comparison to SRS. Pooled meta-analysis estimates showed no significant differences between SRS and hSRS in terms of tumor control (odds ratio [OR], 0.620; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-1.86, P = 0.39), hearing preservation (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.59-1.93, P = 0.83), facial nerve preservation (OR, 0.53; 5% CI, 0.23-1.21, P = 0.13), or trigeminal nerve preservation (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.24-1.89, P = 0.49) at a mean follow-up of 39 months. Statistically significant heterogeneity was found across the studies only for tumor diameter (Higgins's inconsistency index = 65.69%, P = 0.003) but not for other variables.
CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of thirteen studies comparing SRS and hSRS as treatment for VS showed comparable tumor control, hearing preservation, facial nerve preservation, and trigeminal nerve preservation.
METHODS: The PubMed database of articles was searched for studies that compared SRS and hSRS in patients with VS. Variables analyzed include tumor control, hearing preservation, facial nerve preservation, trigeminal nerve preservation, and total complications. Heterogeneity across the studies was gauged using Higgins's inconsistency index. Funnel plots and Egger's regression intercept test were used to address the publication bias.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies that satisfied the search criteria were selected for meta-analysis. The studies identified in our study included 353 SRS and 511 hSRS-treated patients. Analysis of heterogeneity showed that hSRS is employed for relatively larger tumor sizes in comparison to SRS. Pooled meta-analysis estimates showed no significant differences between SRS and hSRS in terms of tumor control (odds ratio [OR], 0.620; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-1.86, P = 0.39), hearing preservation (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.59-1.93, P = 0.83), facial nerve preservation (OR, 0.53; 5% CI, 0.23-1.21, P = 0.13), or trigeminal nerve preservation (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.24-1.89, P = 0.49) at a mean follow-up of 39 months. Statistically significant heterogeneity was found across the studies only for tumor diameter (Higgins's inconsistency index = 65.69%, P = 0.003) but not for other variables.
CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of thirteen studies comparing SRS and hSRS as treatment for VS showed comparable tumor control, hearing preservation, facial nerve preservation, and trigeminal nerve preservation.