Comparison of anatomical-based vs. nTMS-based risk stratification model for predicting postoperative motor outcome and extent of resection in brain tumor surgery.


Journal

NeuroImage. Clinical
ISSN: 2213-1582
Titre abrégé: Neuroimage Clin
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101597070

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 04 11 2022
revised: 07 04 2023
accepted: 13 05 2023
medline: 19 6 2023
pubmed: 27 5 2023
entrez: 26 5 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Two statistical models have been established to evaluate characteristics associated with postoperative motor outcome in patients with glioma associated to the motor cortex (M1) or the corticospinal tract (CST). One model is based on a clinicoradiological prognostic sum score (PrS) while the other one relies on navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) and diffusion-tensor-imaging (DTI) tractography. The objective was to compare the models regarding their prognostic value for postoperative motor outcome and extent of resection (EOR) with the aim of developing a combined, improved model. We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive prospective cohort of patients who underwent resection for motor associated glioma between 2008 and 2020, and received a preoperative nTMS motor mapping with nTMS-based diffusion tensor imaging tractography. The primary outcomes were the EOR and the motor outcome (on the day of discharge and 3 months postoperatively according to the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) grading). For the nTMS model, the infiltration of M1, tumor-tract distance (TTD), resting motor threshold (RMT) and fractional anisotropy (FA) were assesed. For the PrS score (ranging from 1 to 8, lower scores indicating a higher risk), we assessed tumor margins, volume, presence of cysts, contrast agent enhancement, MRI index (grading white matter infiltration), preoperative seizures or sensorimotor deficits. Two hundred and three patients with a median age of 50 years (range: 20-81 years) were analyzed of whom 145 patients (71.4%) received a GTR. The rate of transient new motor deficits was 24.1% and of permanent new motor deficits 18.8%. The nTMS model demonstrated a good discrimination ability for the short-term motor outcome at day 7 of discharge (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.72-0.86) and the long-term motor outcome after 3 months (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.71-0.87). The PrS score was not capable to predict the postoperative motor outcome in this cohort but was moderately associated with the EOR (AUC = 0.64; CI 0.55-0.72). An improved, combined model was calculated to predict the EOR more accurately (AUC = 0.74, 95 %CI: 0.65-0.83). The nTMS model was superior to the clinicoradiological PrS model for potentially predicting the motor outcome. A combined, improved model was calculated to estimate the EOR. Thus, patient counseling and surgical planning in patients with motor-associated tumors should be performed using functional nTMS data combined with tractography.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Two statistical models have been established to evaluate characteristics associated with postoperative motor outcome in patients with glioma associated to the motor cortex (M1) or the corticospinal tract (CST). One model is based on a clinicoradiological prognostic sum score (PrS) while the other one relies on navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) and diffusion-tensor-imaging (DTI) tractography. The objective was to compare the models regarding their prognostic value for postoperative motor outcome and extent of resection (EOR) with the aim of developing a combined, improved model.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive prospective cohort of patients who underwent resection for motor associated glioma between 2008 and 2020, and received a preoperative nTMS motor mapping with nTMS-based diffusion tensor imaging tractography. The primary outcomes were the EOR and the motor outcome (on the day of discharge and 3 months postoperatively according to the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) grading). For the nTMS model, the infiltration of M1, tumor-tract distance (TTD), resting motor threshold (RMT) and fractional anisotropy (FA) were assesed. For the PrS score (ranging from 1 to 8, lower scores indicating a higher risk), we assessed tumor margins, volume, presence of cysts, contrast agent enhancement, MRI index (grading white matter infiltration), preoperative seizures or sensorimotor deficits.
RESULTS
Two hundred and three patients with a median age of 50 years (range: 20-81 years) were analyzed of whom 145 patients (71.4%) received a GTR. The rate of transient new motor deficits was 24.1% and of permanent new motor deficits 18.8%. The nTMS model demonstrated a good discrimination ability for the short-term motor outcome at day 7 of discharge (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.72-0.86) and the long-term motor outcome after 3 months (AUC = 0.79, 95 %CI: 0.71-0.87). The PrS score was not capable to predict the postoperative motor outcome in this cohort but was moderately associated with the EOR (AUC = 0.64; CI 0.55-0.72). An improved, combined model was calculated to predict the EOR more accurately (AUC = 0.74, 95 %CI: 0.65-0.83).
CONCLUSION
The nTMS model was superior to the clinicoradiological PrS model for potentially predicting the motor outcome. A combined, improved model was calculated to estimate the EOR. Thus, patient counseling and surgical planning in patients with motor-associated tumors should be performed using functional nTMS data combined with tractography.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37236052
pii: S2213-1582(23)00125-0
doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2023.103436
pmc: PMC10232884
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

103436

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Meltem Ivren (M)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany; Department of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.

Ulrike Grittner (U)

Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Rutvik Khakhar (R)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Francesco Belotti (F)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany; Neurosurgery Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia Hospital, 25123 Brescia, Italy.

Heike Schneider (H)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Paul Pöser (P)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Federico D'Agata (F)

Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Via Verdi 8, 10124 Turin, Italy.

Giannantonio Spena (G)

Neurosurgery Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia Hospital, 25123 Brescia, Italy.

Peter Vajkoczy (P)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Thomas Picht (T)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany; Cluster of Excellence: "Matters of Activity. Image Space Material," Humboldt University, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany.

Tizian Rosenstock (T)

Department of Neurosurgery, Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, BIH Biomedical Innovation Academy, BIH Charité Digital Clinician Scientist Program, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: tizian.rosenstock@charite.de.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH