Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Samuel J. Hassenbusch x
  • By Author: Sawaya, Raymond x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Ajay K. Bindal, Rajesh K. Bindal, Kenneth R. Hess, Almon Shiu, Samuel J. Hassenbusch, Wei Ming Shi and Raymond Sawaya

✓ Surgery and radiosurgery are effective treatment modalities for brain metastasis. To compare the results of these treatment modalities, the authors followed 31 patients treated by radiosurgery and 62 patients treated by surgery who were retrospectively matched. Patients were matched according to the following criteria: histological characteristics of the primary tumor, extent of systemic disease, preoperative Karnofsky Performance Scale score, time to brain metastasis, number of brain metastases, and patient age and sex. For patients treated by radiosurgery, the median size of the treated lesion was 1.96 cm3 (range 0.41–8.25 cm3) and the median dose was 20 Gy (range 12–22 Gy). The median survival was 7.5 months for patients treated by radiosurgery and 16.4 months for those treated by surgery; this difference was found to be statistically significant using both univariate (p = 0.0018) and multivariate (p = 0.0009) analyses. The difference in survival was due to a higher rate of mortality from brain metastasis in the radiosurgery group than in the surgery group (p < 0.0001) and not due to a difference in the rate of death from systemic disease (p = 0.28). Log-rank analysis showed that the higher mortality rate found in the radiosurgery group was due to a greater progression rate of the radiosurgically treated lesions (p = 0.0001) and not due to the development of new brain metastasis (p = 0.75).

On the basis of their data, the authors conclude that surgery is superior to radiosurgery in the treatment of brain metastasis. Patients who undergo surgical treatment survive longer and have a better local control. The data lead the authors to suggest that the indications for radiosurgery should be limited to surgically inaccessible metastatic tumors or patients in poor medical condition. Surgery should remain the treatment of choice whenever possible.

Restricted access

Michel Lacroix, Dima Abi-Said, Daryl R. Fourney, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Weiming Shi, Franco DeMonte, Frederick F. Lang, Ian E. McCutcheon, Samuel J. Hassenbusch, Eric Holland, Kenneth Hess, Christopher Michael, Daniel Miller and Raymond Sawaya

Object. The extent of tumor resection that should be undertaken in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify significant independent predictors of survival in these patients and to determine whether the extent of resection was associated with increased survival time.

Methods. The authors retrospectively analyzed 416 consecutive patients with histologically proven GBM who underwent tumor resection at the authors' institution between June 1993 and June 1999. Volumetric data and other tumor characteristics identified on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were collected prospectively.

Conclusions. Five independent predictors of survival were identified: age, Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score, extent of resection, and the degree of necrosis and enhancement on preoperative MR imaging studies. A significant survival advantage was associated with resection of 98% or more of the tumor volume (median survival 13 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.4–14.6 months), compared with 8.8 months (95% CI 7.4–10.2 months; p < 0.0001) for resections of less than 98%. Using an outcome scale ranging from 0 to 5 based on age, KPS score, and tumor necrosis on MR imaging, we observed significantly longer survival in patients with lower scores (1–3) who underwent aggressive resections, and a trend toward slightly longer survival was found in patients with higher scores (4–5). Gross-total tumor resection is associated with longer survival in patients with GBM, especially when other predictive variables are favorable.