Cargando…
Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section
INTRODUCTION: and Research Question: Invasive growth of meningiomas into CNS tissue is rare but of prognostic significance. While it has entered the WHO classification as a stand-alone criterion for atypia, its true prognostic impact remains controversial. Retrospective analyses, on which the curren...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293290/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37383436 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.101740 |
_version_ | 1785062969849151488 |
---|---|
author | Behling, Felix Bruneau, Michaël Honegger, Jürgen Berhouma, Moncef Jouanneau, Emmanuel Cavallo, Luigi Cornelius, Jan Frederick Messerer, Mahmoud Daniel, Roy Thomas Froelich, Sébastien Mazzatenta, Diego Meling, Torstein Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios Roche, Pierre-Hugues Schroeder, Henry W.S. Zazpe, Idoya Voormolen, Eduard Visocchi, Massimiliano Kasper, Ekkehard Schittenhelm, Jens Tatagiba, Marcos |
author_facet | Behling, Felix Bruneau, Michaël Honegger, Jürgen Berhouma, Moncef Jouanneau, Emmanuel Cavallo, Luigi Cornelius, Jan Frederick Messerer, Mahmoud Daniel, Roy Thomas Froelich, Sébastien Mazzatenta, Diego Meling, Torstein Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios Roche, Pierre-Hugues Schroeder, Henry W.S. Zazpe, Idoya Voormolen, Eduard Visocchi, Massimiliano Kasper, Ekkehard Schittenhelm, Jens Tatagiba, Marcos |
author_sort | Behling, Felix |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: and Research Question: Invasive growth of meningiomas into CNS tissue is rare but of prognostic significance. While it has entered the WHO classification as a stand-alone criterion for atypia, its true prognostic impact remains controversial. Retrospective analyses, on which the current evidence is based, show conflicting results. Discordant findings might be explained by different intraoperative sampling methodologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To assess the applied sampling methods in the light of the novel prognostic impact of CNS invasion, an anonymous survey was designed and distributed via the EANS website and newsletter. The survey was open from June 5th until July 15th, 2022. RESULTS: After exclusion of 13 incomplete responses, 142 (91.6%) datasets were used for statistical analysis. Only 47.2% of participants’ institutions utilize a standardized sampling method, and 54.9% pursue a complete sampling of the area of contact between the meningioma surface and CNS tissue. Most respondents (77.5%) did not change their sampling practice after introduction of the new grading criteria to the WHO classification of 2016. Intraoperative suspicion of CNS invasion changes the sampling for half of the participants (49.3%). Additional sampling of suspicious areas of interest is reported in 53.5%. Dural attachment and adjacent bone are more readily sampled separately if tumor invasion is suspected (72.5% and 74.6%, respectively), compared to meningioma tissue with signs of CNS invasion (59.9%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative sampling methods during meningioma resection vary among neurosurgical departments. There is need for a structured sampling to optimize the diagnostic yield of CNS invasion. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10293290 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102932902023-06-28 Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section Behling, Felix Bruneau, Michaël Honegger, Jürgen Berhouma, Moncef Jouanneau, Emmanuel Cavallo, Luigi Cornelius, Jan Frederick Messerer, Mahmoud Daniel, Roy Thomas Froelich, Sébastien Mazzatenta, Diego Meling, Torstein Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios Roche, Pierre-Hugues Schroeder, Henry W.S. Zazpe, Idoya Voormolen, Eduard Visocchi, Massimiliano Kasper, Ekkehard Schittenhelm, Jens Tatagiba, Marcos Brain Spine Article INTRODUCTION: and Research Question: Invasive growth of meningiomas into CNS tissue is rare but of prognostic significance. While it has entered the WHO classification as a stand-alone criterion for atypia, its true prognostic impact remains controversial. Retrospective analyses, on which the current evidence is based, show conflicting results. Discordant findings might be explained by different intraoperative sampling methodologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To assess the applied sampling methods in the light of the novel prognostic impact of CNS invasion, an anonymous survey was designed and distributed via the EANS website and newsletter. The survey was open from June 5th until July 15th, 2022. RESULTS: After exclusion of 13 incomplete responses, 142 (91.6%) datasets were used for statistical analysis. Only 47.2% of participants’ institutions utilize a standardized sampling method, and 54.9% pursue a complete sampling of the area of contact between the meningioma surface and CNS tissue. Most respondents (77.5%) did not change their sampling practice after introduction of the new grading criteria to the WHO classification of 2016. Intraoperative suspicion of CNS invasion changes the sampling for half of the participants (49.3%). Additional sampling of suspicious areas of interest is reported in 53.5%. Dural attachment and adjacent bone are more readily sampled separately if tumor invasion is suspected (72.5% and 74.6%, respectively), compared to meningioma tissue with signs of CNS invasion (59.9%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative sampling methods during meningioma resection vary among neurosurgical departments. There is need for a structured sampling to optimize the diagnostic yield of CNS invasion. Elsevier 2023-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10293290/ /pubmed/37383436 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.101740 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Behling, Felix Bruneau, Michaël Honegger, Jürgen Berhouma, Moncef Jouanneau, Emmanuel Cavallo, Luigi Cornelius, Jan Frederick Messerer, Mahmoud Daniel, Roy Thomas Froelich, Sébastien Mazzatenta, Diego Meling, Torstein Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios Roche, Pierre-Hugues Schroeder, Henry W.S. Zazpe, Idoya Voormolen, Eduard Visocchi, Massimiliano Kasper, Ekkehard Schittenhelm, Jens Tatagiba, Marcos Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title | Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title_full | Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title_fullStr | Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title_short | Differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding CNS invasion – Results of a survey on behalf of the EANS skull base section |
title_sort | differences in intraoperative sampling during meningioma surgery regarding cns invasion – results of a survey on behalf of the eans skull base section |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293290/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37383436 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.101740 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT behlingfelix differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT bruneaumichael differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT honeggerjurgen differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT berhoumamoncef differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT jouanneauemmanuel differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT cavalloluigi differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT corneliusjanfrederick differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT messerermahmoud differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT danielroythomas differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT froelichsebastien differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT mazzatentadiego differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT melingtorstein differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT paraskevopoulosdimitrios differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT rochepierrehugues differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT schroederhenryws differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT zazpeidoya differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT voormoleneduard differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT visocchimassimiliano differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT kasperekkehard differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT schittenhelmjens differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection AT tatagibamarcos differencesinintraoperativesamplingduringmeningiomasurgeryregardingcnsinvasionresultsofasurveyonbehalfoftheeansskullbasesection |