Changing treatment strategy of cavernous sinus meningiomas: Experience of a single institution

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorPamir M.N.
dc.contributor.authorKiliç T.
dc.contributor.authorBayrakli F.
dc.contributor.authorPeker S.
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-12T21:53:25Z
dc.date.available2024-07-12T21:53:25Z
dc.date.issued2005en_US
dc.departmentMaltepe Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Oncological treatment of a neoplasm is more than surgical removal of the tumor. Probably, this truth is the reason for the ongoing discussion on cavernous sinus meningiomas in the last decade. Debate on optimal management of cavernous sinus meningiomas aims to compare the different treatment strategies: (a) radical surgical resection and (b) conservative surgical resection complemented with radiosurgical treatment. Materials and Methods: Natural history of the change in the management strategy of cavernous sinus meningiomas in our department before and after GK facility became available in 1997 allowed us to compare the 2 aforementioned strategies. Before installation of a Leksell GK unit at the hospital in 1997, the neurosurgical team at Marmara University Institute of Neurological Sciences and Faculty of Medicine (Istanbul, Turkey) treated patients with cavernous sinus meningioma using radical resection (radical strategy, group A, 10 patients). After 1997, the same neurosurgical team used understanding of surgical removal of the extracavernous sinus tumor component with GK irradiation of the intracavernous part (conservative strategy, group B, 12 patients). Another group of patients, who were treated with GK as a first-step treatment, was analyzed (GK group, group C, 26 patients). Results: At the end of the third year, more stable tumor volume control was achieved in groups B and C; after the second year, an incline in the tumor volume-time graph was detected. Group B resulted in less cranial nerve-related complications; a certain degree of improvement in cranial nerve deficits was observed. Conclusion: Comparing 2 different management strategies for cavernous sinus meningiomas in the same hospital setting using the same neurosurgical group, we conclude that extracavernous resection followed by GK is as effective as radical surgery. Considering cranial nerve complications and third-year tumor volume control achievement, conservative approach yielded better results. Longer follow-up with larger series is necessary. © 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipScientific activities of Türker Kılıç, MD, PhD, have been financially supported by Turkish Academy of Sciences.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.surneu.2005.07.053
dc.identifier.endpageS66en_US
dc.identifier.issn0090-3019
dc.identifier.issueSUPPL. 2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid16256845en_US
dc.identifier.startpageS58en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surneu.2005.07.053
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12415/8498
dc.identifier.volume64en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Inc.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofSurgical Neurologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.snmzKY03457
dc.subjectGamma Knife irradiationen_US
dc.subjectMeningiomaen_US
dc.subjectRadical resectionen_US
dc.titleChanging treatment strategy of cavernous sinus meningiomas: Experience of a single institutionen_US
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu