Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Eric L. Zager x
  • By Author: Chen, H. Isaac x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

H. Isaac Chen, Mark G. Burnett, Jason T. Huse, Robert A. Lustig, Linda J. Bagley and Eric L. Zager

✓Late cerebral radiation necrosis usually occurs within 3 years of stereotactic radiosurgery. The authors report on a case of recurrent radiation necrosis with rapid clinical deterioration and imaging findings resembling those of a malignant glioma. This 68-year-old man, who had a history of a left posterior temporal and thalamic arteriovenous malformation (AVM) treated with linear accelerator radiosurgery 13 years before presentation and complicated by radiation necrosis 11 years before presentation, exhibited new-onset mixed aphasia, right hemiparesis, and right hemineglect. Imaging studies demonstrated hemorrhage and an enlarging, heterogeneously enhancing mass in the region of the previously treated AVM. The patient was treated medically with corticosteroid agents, and stabilized temporarily. Unfortunately, his condition worsened precipitously soon thereafter, requiring the placement of a shunt for relief of obstructive hydrocephalus. Further surgical intervention was offered, but the patient’s family opted for hospice care instead. The patient died 10 weeks after initially presenting to the authors’ institution, and the results of an autopsy demonstrated radiation necrosis.

Symptomatic radiation necrosis can occur more than a decade after stereotactic radiosurgery, necessitating patient follow up during a longer period of time than currently practiced. Furthermore, there is a need for more careful reporting on the natural history of such cases to clarify the pathogenesis of very late and recurrent radiation necrosis after radiosurgery and to define patient groups with a higher risk for these entities.

Restricted access

Ashwin G. Ramayya, H. Isaac Chen, Paul J. Marcotte, Steven Brem, Eric L. Zager, Benjamin Osiemo, Matthew Piazza, Nikhil Sharma, Scott D. McClintock, James M. Schuster, Zarina S. Ali, Patrick Connolly, Gregory G. Heuer, M. Sean Grady, David K. Kung, Ali K. Ozturk, Donald M. O’Rourke and Neil R. Malhotra

OBJECTIVE

Although it is known that intersurgeon variability in offering elective surgery can have major consequences for patient morbidity and healthcare spending, data addressing variability within neurosurgery are scarce. The authors performed a prospective peer review study of randomly selected neurosurgery cases in order to assess the extent of consensus regarding the decision to offer elective surgery among attending neurosurgeons across one large academic institution.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who had undergone standard inpatient surgical interventions of 1 of 4 types (craniotomy for tumor [CFT], nonacute redo CFT, first-time spine surgery with/without instrumentation, and nonacute redo spine surgery with/without instrumentation) during the period 2015–2017 were retrospectively enrolled (n = 9156 patient surgeries, n = 80 randomly selected individual cases, n = 20 index cases of each type randomly selected for review). The selected cases were scored by attending neurosurgeons using a need for surgery (NFS) score based on clinical data (patient demographics, preoperative notes, radiology reports, and operative notes; n = 616 independent case reviews). Attending neurosurgeon reviewers were blinded as to performing provider and surgical outcome. Aggregate NFS scores across various categories were measured. The authors employed a repeated-measures mixed ANOVA model with autoregressive variance structure to compute omnibus statistical tests across the various surgery types. Interrater reliability (IRR) was measured using Cohen’s kappa based on binary NFS scores.

RESULTS

Overall, the authors found that most of the neurosurgical procedures studied were rated as “indicated” by blinded attending neurosurgeons (mean NFS = 88.3, all p values < 0.001) with greater agreement among neurosurgeon raters than expected by chance (IRR = 81.78%, p = 0.016). Redo surgery had lower NFS scores and IRR scores than first-time surgery, both for craniotomy and spine surgery (ANOVA, all p values < 0.01). Spine surgeries with fusion had lower NFS scores than spine surgeries without fusion procedures (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

There was general agreement among neurosurgeons in terms of indication for surgery; however, revision surgery of all types and spine surgery with fusion procedures had the lowest amount of decision consensus. These results should guide efforts aimed at reducing unnecessary variability in surgical practice with the goal of effective allocation of healthcare resources to advance the value paradigm in neurosurgery.