Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 46 items for

  • Author or Editor: Michael W. McDermott x
  • Refine by Access: user x
Clear All Modify Search
Free access

Theodore H. Schwartz and Michael W. McDermott

The Simpson grading scale, developed in 1957 by Donald Simpson, has been considered the gold standard for defining the surgical extent of resection for WHO grade I meningiomas. Since its introduction, the scale and its modifications have generated enormous controversy. The Simpson grade is based on an intraoperative visual assessment of resection, which is subjective and notoriously inaccurate. The majority of studies in which the grading system was used were performed before routine postoperative MRI surveillance was employed, rendering assessments of extent of resection and the definition of recurrence inconsistent. The infiltration and proliferation potential of tumor components such as hyperostotic bone and dural tail vary widely based on tumor location, as does the molecular biology of the tumor, rendering a universal scale for all meningiomas unfeasible. While extent of resection is clearly important at reducing recurrence rates, achieving the highest Simpson grade resection should not always be the goal of surgery.

Donald Simpson’s name and his scale deserve to be recognized and preserved in the historical pantheon of pioneering and transformative neurosurgical concepts. Nevertheless, his eponymous scale is no longer relevant in modern meningioma surgery. While his message of maximizing extent of resection and minimizing morbidity is still germane, a single measure using subjective criteria cannot be applied universally to all meningiomas, regardless of location. Meningioma surgery should be performed with the goal of achieving maximal safe resection, ideally guided by molecularly tagged fluorescent labeling and assessed using objective criteria, including postoperative MRI as well as molecularly tagged scans such as [68Ga]-DOTATATE-PET.

Free access

Theodore H. Schwartz and Michael W. McDermott

The Simpson grading scale, developed in 1957 by Donald Simpson, has been considered the gold standard for defining the surgical extent of resection for WHO grade I meningiomas. Since its introduction, the scale and its modifications have generated enormous controversy. The Simpson grade is based on an intraoperative visual assessment of resection, which is subjective and notoriously inaccurate. The majority of studies in which the grading system was used were performed before routine postoperative MRI surveillance was employed, rendering assessments of extent of resection and the definition of recurrence inconsistent. The infiltration and proliferation potential of tumor components such as hyperostotic bone and dural tail vary widely based on tumor location, as does the molecular biology of the tumor, rendering a universal scale for all meningiomas unfeasible. While extent of resection is clearly important at reducing recurrence rates, achieving the highest Simpson grade resection should not always be the goal of surgery.

Donald Simpson’s name and his scale deserve to be recognized and preserved in the historical pantheon of pioneering and transformative neurosurgical concepts. Nevertheless, his eponymous scale is no longer relevant in modern meningioma surgery. While his message of maximizing extent of resection and minimizing morbidity is still germane, a single measure using subjective criteria cannot be applied universally to all meningiomas, regardless of location. Meningioma surgery should be performed with the goal of achieving maximal safe resection, ideally guided by molecularly tagged fluorescent labeling and assessed using objective criteria, including postoperative MRI as well as molecularly tagged scans such as [68Ga]-DOTATATE-PET.

Free access

Theodore H. Schwartz and Michael W. McDermott

Free access

Theodore H. Schwartz and Michael W. McDermott

Free access

Mitchel S. Berger, Ilona V. Garner, and Michael W. McDermott

Full access

Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, Edward F. Chang, and Michael W. McDermott

Object

Meningiomas arising from the falcotentorial junction are rare. As a result, their clinical presentation and surgical management are not well described. During the past 3 years, the authors have treated six patients with falcotentorial meningiomas.

Methods

Most patients presented with symptoms related to raised intracranial pressure, including headaches, papilledema, and visual and gait disturbances. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a smooth, oval, or round mass, which was typically homogeneously enhancing. Angiography was useful in evaluating arterial supply for embolization, when possible, and determining the status of venous collateral supply and sinus patency. The authors detail the surgical technique used in all six patients. Postoperatively, patients experienced transient cortical blindness, which in all cases spontaneously resolved during the course of several days to weeks. They provide a comprehensive description of the presentation and surgical management of falcotentorial meningiomas.

Conclusions

An excellent outcome can be expected when surgery is predicated on detailed preoperative neuroimaging and knowledge of the nuances of the surgical technique.

Free access

Michael W. McDermott, Jason Sheehan, and Steve Braunstein

Free access

Joao Paulo Almeida and Fred Gentili

Free access

Michael W. McDermott, Kenji Ohata, and Vladimir Benes

Full access

Fred G. Barker II and Michael W. McDermott

An important goal of the Section on Tumors of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) and Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) since its founding in 1985 has been to foster both education and research in the field of brain tumor treatment. As one means of achieving this, the Section awards a number of prizes, research grants, and named lectures at the annual meetings of the AANS and CNS. After a brief examination of similar honors that were given in recognition of pioneering work by Knapp, Cushing, and other early brain tumor researchers, the authors describe the various awards given by the AANS/CNS Section on Tumors since its founding, their philanthropic donors, and the recipients of the awards. The subsequent career of the recipients is briefly examined, in terms of the rate of full publication of award-winning abstracts and achievement of grant funding by awardees.