Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Marco Grimaldi x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Francesco Costa, Giovanni Tosi, Luca Attuati, Andrea Cardia, Alessandro Ortolina, Marco Grimaldi, Fabio Galbusera and Maurizio Fornari

OBJECTIVE

The O-arm system in spine surgery allows greater accuracy, lower rate of screw misplacement, and reduced surgical time. Some concerns have been postulated regarding the radiation doses to patients and surgeons. To the best of the authors' knowledge, most of the studies in the literature were performed with the use of phantoms. The authors present data regarding radiation exposure of the surgeon and operating room (OR) staff in a consecutive series of patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

Radiation exposure data were collected in a series of 107 patients who underwent spine surgery using the O-arm system. The doses received by the surgeon and the staff were collected using electronic dosimeters.

RESULTS

All patients underwent 1–3 scans. The mean radiation dose to the patients was 5.15 mSv (range 1.48–7.64 mSv). The mean dose registered for the scan operator was 0.005 μSv (range 0.00–0.03 μSv) while the other members of the surgical team positioned outside the OR received 0 μSv.

CONCLUSIONS

The O-arm system exposes patients to a higher radiation dose than standard fluoroscopy. However, considering the clear advantages of this system, this adjunctive dose can be considered acceptable. Moreover, the effective dose to the patient can be reduced using collimation or minimizing the parameters of the O-arm system used in this paper. The exposure to operators is essentially negligible when radioprotective garments and protocols are adopted as recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

Restricted access

Pierina Navarria, Federico Pessina, Elena Clerici, Zefferino Rossini, Davide Franceschini, Giuseppe D’Agostino, Ciro Franzese, Tiziana Comito, Mauro Loi, Matteo Simonelli, Elena Lorenzi, Pasquale Persico, Letterio Salvatore Politi, Marco Grimaldi, Lorenzo Bello, Armando Santoro, Maurizio Fornari, Franco Servadei and Marta Scorsetti

OBJECTIVE

Anaplastic gliomas (AGs) are an extremely heterogeneous group of primary brain tumors. More recently, new discoveries have indicated that isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status is the most important parameter predicting survival. The primary aim of the present analysis was to identify prognostic factors, other than IDH status, that eventually impact survival.

METHODS

Patients with available clinical, imaging, and molecular profile data who were amenable to resection were evaluated. The extent of resection (EOR) was defined as gross-total resection (GTR), near-total resection (NTR), subtotal resection (STR), or partial resection (PR). Residual tumor volume (RTV) was quantified. Following surgery, patients received adjuvant chemotherapy alone, radiation therapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ), or sequential radio-chemotherapy. Clinical outcome was evaluated by neurological examination and MRI 1 month after treatment and every 4 months thereafter. Tumor progression was defined according to the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) working group.

RESULTS

Among 402 patients referred to the authors’ institution for AG, 142 were included in the present analysis. Eighty-eight (62%) were male and 54 (38%) were female, with a median age of 43 years (range 19–70 years). At admission, most patients had a Karnofsky Performance Scale score of 90–100 (84.5%) and were symptomatic (93.7%). Forty-eight (33.8%) patients had newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendrogliomas (AOs), and 94 (66.2%) had anaplastic astrocytomas (AAs). Most of them had mutant IDH tumors (67.6%) and methylated O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter status (71.8%). GTR was performed in more than half of the patients (56.3%). RTV was detected in 83 (58.5%) patients. Following surgery, 72 (50.7%) patients received radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant TMZ, 48 (33.8%) received sequential radio-chemotherapy, and 22 (15.5%) received adjuvant chemotherapy alone. The median follow-up time was 40 months (range 16–146 months). The median PFS time and the 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFS rates were 35 months (95% CI 27–76) and 78.9% ± 3.4%, 49.7% ± 4.6%, and 42.7% ± 5.4%, respectively. The median OS time and the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 91 months (95% CI 66–95) and 90.1% ± 2.5%, 70.9% ± 4.2%, and 61.8% ± 4.9%, respectively. Prognostic factors predicting survival other than molecular profile were the EOR and the RTV (p < 0.0001). Sequential radio-chemotherapy was the more effective treatment administered.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to IDH status, EOR and the RTV have proved to statistically impact survival. The pivotal role of adjuvant radiotherapy has been recorded in all AG patients, regardless of tumor features.