Cargando…
STMO-11 CLINICAL EFFICACY OF AWAKE SURGERY: ANALYSIS OF 335 CASE ON EXTENT OF RESECTION AND SURVIVAL TIME
INTRODUCTION: Awake craniotomy (AS) with intraoperative mapping can be compatible to obtain maximal resection and preserve neurological function for glioma surgery. However, there is less evidence to improve overall survival for glioma patients. We compared the long-term outcome of glioma resection...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7213135/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/noajnl/vdz039.089 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Awake craniotomy (AS) with intraoperative mapping can be compatible to obtain maximal resection and preserve neurological function for glioma surgery. However, there is less evidence to improve overall survival for glioma patients. We compared the long-term outcome of glioma resection during AS and general anesthesia (GA). METHODS: Continuous 335 patients with newly diagnosed glioma of WHO grade2 (G2) or higher who underwent surgery with intraoperative MRI between 2000 and 2013 were reviewed. Three-dimensional volumetric tumor measurements before and after operation were made. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate the effect of awake surgery on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The mean age of all cases was 46 years, male: female 199: 136, mean preoperative tumor volume (PTV) 44.5cc, mean extent of resection (EOR) 88.31%, and median survival (MST) 82.6 months. MST of G4 was significantly longer in the AS group (AS 38.9 months vs. GA group 22.0 months: p = 0.03), while multivariate analysis showed that age and KPS was a significant prognostic factor, but AS was not. There was no significant difference in the EOR of G3 (AS group 80.1% vs. general anesthesia 84.2%: p = 0.365), and MST was also not significantly different (AS group 134.8 months vs. GA group 117.9 months: p = 0.338). G2 also had no significant difference in the EOR (AS group 84.6% vs. GA group 86.7%; p = 0.92), and MST was also not significantly different (AS group 152.9 months vs. GA group 135.1 months: p = 0.235). Analysis of G2 or G3 showed no significant differences in PTV, KPS, and age at the surgery between two groups. CONCLUSION: Even if a glioma is located close to or within the eloquent area, AS can lead to EOR and OS equivalent to the removal of the non-eloquent area under GA. |
---|