Surgical management of spinal meningiomas: focus on unilateral posterior approach and anterior localization

Restricted access

OBJECTIVE

Spinal meningiomas (sMNGs) are relatively rare in comparison to intracranial MNGs. sMNGs localized anterior to the denticulate ligament (aMNGs) represent a surgically challenging subgroup. A high perioperative complication rate due to the need for complex surgical approaches has been described. In the present study, the authors report on their surgical experience that involves two institutions in which 207 patients underwent surgery for sMNGs. Special focus was placed on patients with aMNGs that were treated via a unilateral posterior approach (ULPA).

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2017, 207 patients underwent resection of sMNGs at one of two institutions. The following characteristics were assessed: tumor size and localization, surgical approach, duration of surgery, grade of resection, peri- and postoperative complication rates, and neurological outcome. Data were compared between the subgroups of patients according to the lesion’s relationship to the denticulate ligament and to surgical approach.

RESULTS

The authors identified 48 patients with aMNGs, 86 patients with lateral MNGs, and 76 patients with posterior MNGs (pMNGs). Overall, 66.6% of aMNGs and 64% of pMNGs were reached via a ULPA. aMNGs that were approached via a ULPA showed reduced duration of surgery (131 vs 224 minutes, p < 0.0001) and had surgical complication rates and neurological outcomes comparable to those of lesions that were approached via a bilateral approach. No significant differences in complication rate, outcomes, and extent of resection were seen between aMNGs and pMNGs.

CONCLUSIONS

The duration of surgery, extent of resection, and outcomes are comparable between aMNGs and pMNGs when removed via a ULPA. Thus, ULPA represents a safe route to achieve a gross-total resection, even in cases of aMNG.

ABBREVIATIONS AMNG = anterior meningioma; BLPA = bilateral posterior approach; GTR = gross-total resection; KPS = Karnofsky Performance Scale; pMNG = posterior meningioma; sMNG = spinal meningioma; ULPA = unilateral posterior approach.

Article Information

Correspondence Peter Vajkoczy: Universitätsmedizin Charité Berlin, Germany. peter.vajkoczy@charite.de.

INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online December 7, 2018; DOI: 10.3171/2018.8.SPINE18198.

Disclosures Dr. Meyer reports being a consultant for Medtronic, DePuy, Icotec, Ulrich Medical, Brainlab, and Relievant. He has received support from Relievant, Icotec, and Medtronic for non–study-related clinical or research efforts. He receives royalties from Spineart.

© AANS, except where prohibited by US copyright law.

Headings

Figures

  • View in gallery

    A: Mean age at diagnosis of an sMNG depending on the lesion’s localization within the spinal canal. B: Percentage of axial spinal canal occupied by the MNG. C: Size of sMNG in terms of longitudinal, sagittal, and axial diameter. D: Distribution of sMNGs within the spinal canal and according to the denticulate ligament. E: Surgical approaches, which were used for different MNG localizations. ns = not significant.

  • View in gallery

    A: Surgical duration in minutes (min.) according to approach and localization of the MNG. B: Extent of resection according to Simpson grade. C: Hospital stay in days according to the localization of the sMNG. D: Surgical complication rate according to localization of the MNG within the spinal canal. E: Changes in McCormick score before and after resection.

  • View in gallery

    Preoperative sagittal (A) and axial (B) MR images with contrast agent showing an aMNG at the thoracolumbar junction. Postoperative sagittal (C) and axial (D) MR images showing complete resection of the aMNG. Postoperative CT scans (E and F) demonstrating the extent of bony removal for a ULPA.

References

1

Aboul-Enein HAKhidr WMAbdeen KMMadawi AA: Surgical management of ventrally based lower cervical (subaxial) meningiomas through the lateral approach: report on 16 cases. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 139:1521582015

2

Ambekar SSharma MKukreja SNanda A: Complications and outcomes of surgery for spinal meningioma: a Nationwide Inpatient Sample analysis from 2003 to 2010. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 118:65682014

3

Bydon MGokaslan ZL: Spinal meningioma resection. World Neurosurg 83:103210332015

4

Durand ALabrousse FJouvet ABauchet LKalamaridès MMenei P: WHO grade II and III meningiomas: a study of prognostic factors. J Neurooncol 95:3673752009

5

Gelabert González MGarcía Pravos AFernández Villa JM: [Spinal meningiomas.] Neurologia 15:58622000 (Span)

6

Goldbrunner RMinniti GPreusser MJenkinson MDSallabanda KHoudart E: EANO guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of meningiomas. Lancet Oncol 17:e383e3912016

7

Gottfried ONGluf WQuinones-Hinojosa AKan PSchmidt MH: Spinal meningiomas: surgical management and outcome. Neurosurg Focus 14(6):e22003

8

Kim CHChung CKLee SHJahng TAHyun SJKim KJ: Long-term recurrence rates after the removal of spinal meningiomas in relation to Simpson grades. Eur Spine J 25:402540322016

9

Lonjon NRusso VBarbarisi MChoi DAllibone JCasey A: Spinal cervical meningiomas: the challenge posed by ventral location. World Neurosurg 89:4644732016

10

Louis DNPerry AReifenberger Gvon Deimling AFigarella-Branger DCavenee WK: The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:8038202016

11

Maiti TKBir SCPatra DPKalakoti PGuthikonda BNanda A: Spinal meningiomas: clinicoradiological factors predicting recurrence and functional outcome. Neurosurg Focus 41(2):E62016

12

Notani NMiyazaki MKanezaki SIshihara TKawano MTsumura H: Surgical management of ventrally located spinal meningiomas via posterior approach. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 27:1811862017

13

Pompili ACaroli FCrispo FGiovannetti MRaus LVidiri A: Unilateral laminectomy approach for the removal of spinal meningiomas and schwannomas: impact on pain, spinal stability, and neurologic results. World Neurosurg 85:2822912016

14

Riad HKnafo SSegnarbieux FLonjon N: Spinal meningiomas: surgical outcome and literature review. Neurochirurgie 59:30342013

15

Setzer MVatter HMarquardt GSeifert VVrionis FD: Management of spinal meningiomas: surgical results and a review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 23(4):E142007

16

Sun SQCai CRavindra VMGamble PYarbrough CKDacey RG: Simpson grade I–III resection of spinal atypical (World Health Organization grade II) meningiomas is associated with symptom resolution and low recurrence. Neurosurgery 76:7397462015

17

Takami TNaito KYamagata TYoshimura MArima HOhata K: Posterolateral approach for spinal intradural meningioma with ventral attachment. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine 6:1731782015

18

Tola SDe Angelis MBistazzoni SChiaramonte CEsposito VPaolini S: Hemilaminectomy for spinal meningioma: a case series of 20 patients with a focus on ventral- and ventrolateral lesions. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 148:35412016

19

Tsuda KAkutsu HYamamoto TNakai KIshikawa EMatsumura A: Is Simpson grade I removal necessary in all cases of spinal meningioma? Assessment of postoperative recurrence during long-term follow-up. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 54:9079132014

20

Westwick HJShamji MF: Effects of sex on the incidence and prognosis of spinal meningiomas: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results study. J Neurosurg Spine 23:3683732015

21

Yamamuro KSeichi AKimura AKikkawa IKojima MInoue H: Histological investigation of resected dura mater attached to spinal meningioma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:E1398E14012012

TrendMD

Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 335 335 335
Full Text Views 70 70 70
PDF Downloads 33 33 33
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0

PubMed

Google Scholar