Dergiler / Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal / 2019 / Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of the Prognostic Factors Effective on Local Recurrence in Atypical Meningiomas

Sayfa
171–175
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In our study, the resection grade was identified as one of the most important factors affecting the prognosis.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Introduction: Meningiomas are the most common brain tumors and account for 13%–26% of intracranial tumors.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Approximately, 5%–7% of the meningiomas are termed as atypical meningiomas.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In our study, the resection grade was identified as one of the most important factors affecting the prognosis.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Introduction: Meningiomas are the most common brain tumors and account for 13%–26% of intracranial tumors. Approximately, 5%–7% of the meningiomas are termed as atypical meningiomas. The prognosis in patients with benign meningioma (Grade I) is generally very favorable. The outcome for patients with atypical meningioma is progression that is rapid and more invasive. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 35 patients with atypical meningiomas who underwent surgery. Patients’ age at diagnosis, gender, tumor location, Simpson grade, local tumor recurrence, and treatment with radiation therapy were evaluated. Results: Patients were aged 29–54 (mean±standard deviation: 54.6±12.1) years; 18 were females and 17 males. The recurrence rate was 6/35 (17.1%). Recurrence was found two times more in females. The parasagittal location of the tumor was most common in 66.6% cases. One-half of the patients did not receive adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). Patients characterized with Simpson Grade I showed lower recurrence rate compared to Grade III. Discussion and Conclusion: Atypical meningioma recurs more frequently than Grade I lesions. The current management of atypical meningioma is maximal safe resection of tumor followed by adjuvant RT. Adjuvant RT following surgical resection is recommended particularly for incompletely excised tumors or tumors located in the parasagittal area or posterior fossa. In our study, the resection grade was identified as one of the most important factors affecting the prognosis.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKAR, E., EMON, S. T., CEMAN, D., YOLCU, A., İŞ, M. (2019). Evaluation of the Prognostic Factors Effective on Local Recurrence in Atypical Meningiomas. Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal, Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 2, 171–175. https://ajindex.com/articles/190431

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (1)

  1. Riemenschneider MJ, Perry A, Reifenberger G. Histological classification and molecular genetics of meningiomas. Lancet Neurol 2006;5:1045–54. [CrossRef ] 2. Kawahara Y, Nakada M, Hayashi Y, Kai Y, Hayashi Y, Uchiyama N, et al. Prediction of high-grade meningioma by preoperative MRI assessment. J Neurooncol 2012;108:147–52. [CrossRef ] 3. Fuller GN, Scheithauer BW. The 2007 Revised World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System: newly codified entities. Brain Pathol 2007;17:304–7. [CrossRef ] 4. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, Burger PC, Jouvet A, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 2007;114:97–109. 5. Ayerbe J, Lobato RD, de la Cruz J, Alday R, Rivas JJ, Gómez PA, et al. Risk factors predicting recurrence in patients operated on for intracranial meningioma. A multivariate analysis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1999;141:921–32. [CrossRef ] 6. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella- Branger D, Cavenee WK, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016;131:803–20. [CrossRef ] 7. Aizer AA, Arvold ND, Catalano P, Claus EB, Golby AJ, Johnson MD, et al. Adjuvant radiation therapy, local recurrence, and the need for salvage therapy in atypical meningioma. Neuro Oncol 2014;16:1547–53. [CrossRef ] 8. Schwarz AJ, Danckaert A, Reese T, Gozzi A, Paxinos G, Watson C, et al. A stereotaxic MRI template set for the rat brain with tissue class distribution maps and co-registered anatomical atlas: application to pharmacological MRI. Neuroimage 2006;32:538–50. [CrossRef ] 9. Wang YC, Chuang CC, Wei KC, Chang CN, Lee ST, Wu CT, et al. Long Term Surgical Outcome and Prognostic Factors of Atypical and Malignant Meningiomas. Sci Rep 2016;6:35743. 10. Perry A. Menigiomas. Russell and Rubinstein’s Pathology of Tumors of the Nervous System. R.M. McLendon RE, Bigner DD, editors. London: Hodder Arnold; 2006. pp. 427–474. 11. Mut M. Atipik ve malign menenjiomlar. Türk Nöroşirurji Dergisi 2011;21:173–7. 12. Roser F, Nakamura M, Jacobs C, Vorkapic P, Samii M. Sphenoid wing meningiomas with osseous involvement. Surg Neurol 2005;64:37–43. [CrossRef ] 13. Filippi CG, Edgar MA, Uluğ AM, Prowda JC, Heier LA, Zimmerman RD. Appearance of meningiomas on diffusion-weighted images: correlating diffusion constants with histopathologic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:65–72. 14. Kap