-
Comparative Study
Olfactory groove meningioma: report of 99 cases surgically treated at the Catholic University School of Medicine, Rome.
- Roberto Pallini, Eduardo Fernandez, Liverana Lauretti, Francesco Doglietto, Quintino Giorgio D'Alessandris, Nicola Montano, Gabriele Capo, Mario Meglio, and Giulio Maira.
- Institute of Neurosurgery, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: pallini@rm.unicatt.it.
- World Neurosurg. 2015 Feb 1;83(2):219-31.e1-3.
ObjectiveWe reviewed our series of olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs) with the aim to relate the surgical approach with outcome and to define clinical and pathologic predictors of prognosis.MethodsNinety-nine patients who underwent 113 craniotomies at our Institution between 1984 and 2010 were entered this study. The relationship between surgical approach (bifrontal, fronto-orbito-basal, and pterional) and either tumor diameter, extent of tumor resection, complication rate, need of reoperation, and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) was analyzed. The impact of age (≤ 70 vs. > 70 years), sex, tumor diameter (< 6 vs. ≥ 6 cm), pre- and postoperative KPS (< 80 vs. ≥ 80), Simpson grade (I-II vs. III-IV), and World Health Organization (WHO) histologic grade (I vs. II-III) on survival was assessed. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted and differences in survival between groups of patients were compared. A multivariate analysis adjusted for age, pre- and postoperative KPS, Simpson grade, tumor diameter, and WHO histologic grade also was performed.ResultsThe fronto-orbito-basal approach (n = 22) allowed a significantly greater percentage of Simpson I-II removals than the bifrontal (n = 70) and pterional approach (n = 21) (P = 0.0354 and P = 0.0485, respectively). The risk of life-threatening complications trended to be lower in patients operated upon either via the fronto-orbito-basal and via the pterional approach than in those treated via the bifrontal approach. Retraction-related brain swelling did not occur in any case after the fronto-orbito-basal approach (P = 0.0384); however, this approach was associated with a greater rate of cerebrospinal fluid leak (P = 0.0011). Among prognostic factors, age ≤ 70 years (P = 0.0044), tumor diameter <6 cm (P = 0.0455), pre- and postoperative KPS ≥ 80 (both P < 0.0001), Simpson grade I-II (P = 0.0096), and WHO histologic grade I (P = 0.0112) were significantly associated with longer overall survival. Age (P = 0.0393) and WHO histologic grade (P = 0.0418) emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival on multivariate analysis.ConclusionIn the largest series of OGMs published to date, the bifrontal approach was associated with a greater risk of life-threatening complications compared with the lateral pterional and fronto-orbito-basal approaches. The fronto-orbito-basal approach provided greater chances of total tumor removal than the bifrontal and pterional approaches. Two independent factors for overall survival of patients with OGM were identified, namely age and WHO grade.Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.