Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Øystein Vesterli Tveiten x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Øystein Vesterli Tveiten, Matthew L. Carlson, Frederik Goplen, Erling Myrseth, Colin L. W. Driscoll, Rupavathana Mahesparan, Michael J. Link and Morten Lund-Johansen

OBJECTIVE

Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used in studies of vestibular schwannoma (VS); however, few studies have examined self-evaluated facial nerve function and its relation to physician-reported outcomes. The primary objective of this study was to compare patient self-evaluations of facial disability with physician-evaluated facial nerve status and with self-evaluations of a healthy control group. The second objective was to provide insight into the controversial subject of the optimal initial management of small- and medium-sized VSs; consequently, the authors compared patient-reported facial nerve disability following treatment via observation (OBS), Gamma Knife surgery (GKS), or microsurgery (MS). Lastly, the authors sought to identify risk factors for facial nerve dysfunction following treatment for small- and medium-sized VSs.

METHODS

All patients with a VS 3 cm or smaller that was singly treated with OBS, GKS, or MS at either of 2 independent treatment centers between 1998 and 2008 were retrospectively identified. Longitudinal facial nerve measures and clinical data, including facial nerve evaluation according to the House-Brackmann (HB) grading system, were extracted from existing VS databases. Supplementing the objective data were Facial Disability Index (FDI) scores, which were obtained via survey of patients a mean of 7.7 years after initial treatment.

RESULTS

The response rate among the 682 eligible patients was 79%; thus, data from a total of 539 patients were analyzed. One hundred forty-eight patients had been managed by OBS, 247 with GKS, and 144 with MS. Patients who underwent microsurgery had larger tumors and were younger than those who underwent OBS or GKS. Overall, facial nerve outcomes were satisfactory following treatment, with more than 90% of patients having HB Grade I function at the last clinical follow-up. Treatment was the major risk factor for facial nerve dysfunction. Almost one-fifth of the patients treated with MS had an objective decline in facial nerve function, whereas only 2% in the GKS group and 0% in the OBS cohort had a decline. The physical subscale of the FDI in the VS patients was highly associated with HB grade; however, the social/well-being subscale of the FDI was not. Thus, any social disability caused by facial palsy was not detectable by use of this questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with small- and medium-sized VSs attain excellent long-term facial nerve function and low facial nerve disability regardless of treatment modality. Tumor size and microsurgical treatment are risk factors for facial nerve dysfunction and self-reported disability. The FDI questionnaire is sensitive to the physical but not the social impairment associated with facial dysfunction.

Full access

Matthew L. Carlson, Øystein Vesterli Tveiten, Colin L. Driscoll, Christopher J. Boes, Molly J. Sullan, Frederik K. Goplen, Morten Lund-Johansen and Michael J. Link

OBJECT

The primary goals of this study were: 1) to examine the influence of disease and treatment on headache in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS); and 2) to identify clinical predictors of long-term headache disability.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study with international multicenter enrollment. Patients included those with primary sporadic < 3-cm VS and a separate group of general population control subjects without tumors. Interventions included a postal survey incorporating the Headache Disability Inventory (HDI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a VS symptom questionnaire. The main outcome measures were univariate and multivariable associations with HDI total score.

RESULTS

The overall survey response rate was 79%. Data from 538 patients with VS were analyzed. The mean age at time of survey was 64 years, 56% of patients were female, and the average duration between treatment and survey was 7.7 years. Twenty-seven percent of patients received microsurgery, 46% stereotactic radiosurgery, and 28% observation. Patients with VS who were managed with observation were more than twice as likely to have severe headache disability compared with 103 control subjects without VS. When accounting for baseline differences, there was no statistically significant difference in HDI outcome between treatment modalities at time of survey. Similarly, among the microsurgery cohort, the long-term risk of severe headache disability was not different between surgical approaches. Multivariable regression demonstrated that younger age, greater anxiety and depression, and a preexisting diagnosis of headache were the primary predictors of severe long-term headache disability, while tumor size and treatment modality had little influence.

CONCLUSIONS

At a mean of almost 8 years following treatment, approximately half of patients with VS experience headaches of varying frequency and severity. Patient-driven factors including age, sex, mental health, and preexisting headache syndrome are the strongest predictors of long-term severe headache disability. Tumor size and treatment modality have less impact. These data may assist with patient counseling regarding long-term expectations following diagnosis and treatment.

Full access

Matthew L. Carlson, Oystein Vesterli Tveiten, Colin L. Driscoll, Frederik K. Goplen, Brian A. Neff, Bruce E. Pollock, Nicole M. Tombers, Marina L. Castner, Monica K. Finnkirk, Erling Myrseth, Paal-Henning Pedersen, Morten Lund-Johansen and Michael J. Link

OBJECT

The optimal treatment for sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) is highly controversial. To date, the majority of studies comparing treatment modalities have focused on a narrow scope of technical outcomes including facial function, hearing status, and tumor control. Very few publications have investigated health-related quality of life (HRQOL) differences between individual treatment groups, and none have used a disease-specific HRQOL instrument.

METHODS

All patients with sporadic small- to medium-sized VSs who underwent primary microsurgery, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), or observation between 1998 and 2008 were identified. Subjects were surveyed via postal questionnaire using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System short form (PROMIS-10), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), and the Penn Acoustic Neuroma Quality-of-Life (PANQOL) scale. Additionally, a pool of general population adults was surveyed, providing a nontumor control group for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 642 respondents were analyzed. The overall response rate for patients with VS was 79%, and the mean time interval between treatment and survey was 7.7 years. Using multivariate regression, there were no statistically significant differences between management groups with respect to the PROMIS-10 physical or mental health dimensions, the SF-36 Physical or Mental Component Summary scores, or the PANQOL general, anxiety, hearing, or energy subdomains. Patients who underwent SRS or observation reported a better total PANQOL score and higher PANQOL facial, balance, and pain subdomain scores than the microsurgical cohort (p < 0.02). The differences in scores between the nontumor control group and patients with VS were greater than differences observed between individual treatment groups for the majority of measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences in HRQOL outcomes following SRS, observation, and microsurgery for VS are small. Notably, the diagnosis of VS rather than treatment strategy most significantly impacts quality of life. Understanding that a large number of VSs do not grow following discovery, and that intervention does not confer a long-term HRQOL advantage, small- and medium-sized VS should be initially observed, while intervention should be reserved for patients with unequivocal tumor growth or intractable symptoms that are amenable to treatment. Future studies assessing HRQOL in VS patients should prioritize use of validated disease-specific measures, such as the PANQOL, given the significant limitations of generic instruments in distinguishing between treatment groups and tumor versus nontumor subjects.