Perioperative imaging in patients treated with resection of brain metastases: a survey by the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) Youngsters committee.
Brain metastases
International guidelines
Perioperative imaging
Postoperative MRI
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 May 2020
12 May 2020
Historique:
received:
06
01
2020
accepted:
23
04
2020
entrez:
14
5
2020
pubmed:
14
5
2020
medline:
3
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Neurosurgical resection represents an important treatment option in the modern, multimodal therapy approach of brain metastases (BM). Guidelines for perioperative imaging exist for primary brain tumors to guide postsurgical treatment. Optimal perioperative imaging of BM patients is so far a matter of debate as no structured guidelines exist. A comprehensive questionnaire about perioperative imaging was designed by the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) Youngsters Committee. The survey was distributed to physicians via the EANO network to perform a descriptive overview on the current habits and their variability on perioperative imaging. Chi square test was used for dichotomous variables. One hundred twenty physicians worldwide responded to the survey. MRI was the preferred preoperative imaging method (93.3%). Overall 106/120 (88.3%) physicians performed postsurgical imaging routinely including MRI alone (62/120 [51.7%]), postoperative CT (29/120 [24.2%]) and MRI + CT (15/120 [12.5%]). No correlation of postsurgical MRI utilization in academic vs. non-academic hospitals (58/89 [65.2%] vs. 19/31 [61.3%], p = 0.698) was found. Early postoperative MRI within ≤72 h after resection is obtained by 60.8% of the participants. The most frequent reason for postsurgical imaging was to evaluate the extent of tumor resection (73/120 [60.8%]). In case of residual tumor, 32/120 (26.7%) participants indicated to adjust radiotherapy, 34/120 (28.3%) to consider re-surgery to achieve complete resection and 8/120 (6.7%) to evaluate both. MRI was the preferred imaging method in the preoperative setting. In the postoperative course, imaging modalities and timing showed high variability. International guidelines for perioperative imaging with special focus on postoperative MRI to assess residual tumor are warranted to optimize standardized management and adjuvant treatment decisions for BM patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Neurosurgical resection represents an important treatment option in the modern, multimodal therapy approach of brain metastases (BM). Guidelines for perioperative imaging exist for primary brain tumors to guide postsurgical treatment. Optimal perioperative imaging of BM patients is so far a matter of debate as no structured guidelines exist.
METHODS
METHODS
A comprehensive questionnaire about perioperative imaging was designed by the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) Youngsters Committee. The survey was distributed to physicians via the EANO network to perform a descriptive overview on the current habits and their variability on perioperative imaging. Chi square test was used for dichotomous variables.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred twenty physicians worldwide responded to the survey. MRI was the preferred preoperative imaging method (93.3%). Overall 106/120 (88.3%) physicians performed postsurgical imaging routinely including MRI alone (62/120 [51.7%]), postoperative CT (29/120 [24.2%]) and MRI + CT (15/120 [12.5%]). No correlation of postsurgical MRI utilization in academic vs. non-academic hospitals (58/89 [65.2%] vs. 19/31 [61.3%], p = 0.698) was found. Early postoperative MRI within ≤72 h after resection is obtained by 60.8% of the participants. The most frequent reason for postsurgical imaging was to evaluate the extent of tumor resection (73/120 [60.8%]). In case of residual tumor, 32/120 (26.7%) participants indicated to adjust radiotherapy, 34/120 (28.3%) to consider re-surgery to achieve complete resection and 8/120 (6.7%) to evaluate both.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
MRI was the preferred imaging method in the preoperative setting. In the postoperative course, imaging modalities and timing showed high variability. International guidelines for perioperative imaging with special focus on postoperative MRI to assess residual tumor are warranted to optimize standardized management and adjuvant treatment decisions for BM patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32398144
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-06897-z
pii: 10.1186/s12885-020-06897-z
pmc: PMC7216695
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
410Références
Neurosurgery. 2004 May;54(5):1061-70; discussion 1070-2
pubmed: 15113459
Neuro Oncol. 2017 Feb 1;19(2):162-174
pubmed: 28391295
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 1;30(4):419-25
pubmed: 22203767
Neuro Oncol. 2003 Oct;5(4):268-74
pubmed: 14565164
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 18;8(10):e76988
pubmed: 24204718
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015 Sep;157(9):1573-80
pubmed: 26156037
J Neurosurg. 1986 Oct;65(4):545-9
pubmed: 3531430
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2012 Feb;154(2):223-8; discussion 228
pubmed: 22080159
Clin Neuropathol. 2001 Jan-Feb;20(1):38-42
pubmed: 11220694
J Neurosurg. 2012 Dec;117(6):1032-8
pubmed: 23039151
Neurosurgery. 2006 Apr;58(4 Suppl 2):ONS-292-303; discussion ONS-303-4
pubmed: 16582653
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2012 Sep;9(5):491-500
pubmed: 23116076
Neurosurgery. 2012 Jan;70(1):234-43; discussion 243-4
pubmed: 21593697
BMC Neurol. 2015 Oct 20;15:211
pubmed: 26487091
Lancet Oncol. 2009 Nov;10(11):1037-44
pubmed: 19801201
N Engl J Med. 1990 Feb 22;322(8):494-500
pubmed: 2405271
Lancet Oncol. 2006 May;7(5):392-401
pubmed: 16648043
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2000 Sep;126(9):529-41
pubmed: 11003565
Handb Clin Neurol. 2018;149:89-112
pubmed: 29307364
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 13;8(11):e79846
pubmed: 24348904
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;28(8):1942-1948
pubmed: 28475680
J Neurooncol. 2016 Nov;130(2):269-282
pubmed: 27174197
Eur Radiol. 2018 Aug;28(8):3306-3317
pubmed: 29536240
J Neurosurg. 2001 Aug;95(2):190-8
pubmed: 11780887
Neurotherapeutics. 2009 Jul;6(3):465-77
pubmed: 19560737
J Neurosurg. 2013 Jun;118(6):1269-78
pubmed: 23521547
Neurosurgery. 2008 Apr;62(4):753-64; discussion 264-6
pubmed: 18496181
Lancet Oncol. 2018 Jan;19(1):e33-e42
pubmed: 29304360
J Neurosurg Sci. 2019 Apr;63(2):127-134
pubmed: 30290696
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Aug;18(8):1040-1048
pubmed: 28687375
Neurosurgery. 2005 Nov;57(5 Suppl):S24-32; discusssion S1-4
pubmed: 16237284
J Neurooncol. 2014 Jun;118(2):363-367
pubmed: 24736830
Prog Neurol Surg. 2012;25:55-73
pubmed: 22236668
Oncotarget. 2016 Oct 11;7(41):66776-66789
pubmed: 27564260
Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2011 Apr;22(2):253-68, ix
pubmed: 21435575
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jul 31;359(5):492-507
pubmed: 18669428
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 1;31(1):65-72
pubmed: 23213105
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Jan 10;29(2):134-41
pubmed: 21041710
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Aug;18(8):1049-1060
pubmed: 28687377
Neuro Oncol. 2013 Dec;15(12):1664-72
pubmed: 24084410
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Aug;15(9):e395-403
pubmed: 25079102
JAMA. 1998 Nov 4;280(17):1485-9
pubmed: 9809728
Chin Clin Oncol. 2015 Jun;4(2):23
pubmed: 26112809
J Neurol. 2006 Sep;253(9):1123-36
pubmed: 16988793
J Neurosurg. 2006 Jul;105(1):34-40
pubmed: 16871879