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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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