Giant presacral schwannomas are rare sacral tumors found in less than 1 of every 40,000 hospitalizations. Current management of these tumors is based solely upon case reports and small case series. In this paper the authors report the results of a systematic review of the available English literature on presacral schwannoma, focused on identifying the influence of tumor size, tumor morphology, surgical approach, and extent of resection (EOR) on recurrence-free survival and postoperative complications.
The medical literature (PubMed and EMBASE) was queried for reports of surgically managed sacral schwannoma, either involving 2 or more contiguous vertebral levels or with a diameter ≥ 5 cm. Tumor size and morphology, surgical approach, EOR, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and survival data were recorded.
Seventy-six articles were included, covering 123 unique patients (mean age 44.1 ± 1.4 years, 50.4% male). The most common presenting symptoms were leg pain (28.7%), lower back pain (21.3%), and constipation (15.7%). Most surgeries used an open anterior-only (40.0%) or posterior-only (30%) approach. Postoperative complications occurred in 25.6% of patients and local recurrence was noted in 5.4%. En bloc resection significantly improved progression-free survival relative to subtotal resection (p = 0.03). No difference existed between en bloc and gross-total resection (GTR; p = 0.25) or among the surgical approaches (p = 0.66). Postoperative complications were more common following anterior versus posterior approaches (p = 0.04). Surgical blood loss was significantly correlated with operative duration and tumor volume on multiple linear regression (both p < 0.001).
Presacral schwannoma can reasonably be treated with either en bloc or piecemeal GTR. The approach should be dictated by lesion morphology, and recurrence is infrequent. Anterior approaches may increase the risk of postoperative complications.
AlfieriA, CampelloM, BrogerM, VitaleM, SchwarzA: Low-back pain as the presenting sign in a patient with a giant, sacral cellular schwannoma: 10-year follow-up. 14:167–171, 201110.3171/2010.10.SPINE1015)| false
ChandhanayingyongC, AsavamongkolkulA, LektrakulN, MuangsomboonS: The management of sacral schwannoma: report of four cases and review of literature. 2008:845132, 200810.1155/2008/84513218779869)| false
GuyattGH, OxmanAD, VistGE, KunzR, Falck-YtterY, Alonso-CoelloP, : GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. 336:924–926, 200810.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD18436948)| false
LacarriereELe LongECaremelRGriseP: Removal of pelvic schwannoma using a retroperitoneoscopic and open double approach: description of an effective novel technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A22:269–2722012
LacarriereE, Le LongE, CaremelR, GriseP: Removal of pelvic schwannoma using a retroperitoneoscopic and open double approach: description of an effective novel technique. 22:269–272, 201210.1089/lap.2011.040722335571)| false
MarinelloFG, TargaronaEM, LuppiCR, BoguñaI, MoletJ, TriasM: Laparoscopic approach to retrorectal tumors: review of the literature and report of 4 cases. 21:10–13, 20112130438010.1097/SLE.0b013e3182020e69)| false
OshimaY, MiyoshiK, MikamiY, KawamuraN: Pelvic ring reconstruction with a vascularized pedicle iliac bone graft for a large sacral schwannoma. 18:200–202, 200510.1097/01.bsd.0000134782.87082.fd15800443)| false
SohnS, KimJ, ChungCK, LeeNR, SohnMJ, KimSH: A nation-wide epidemiological study of newly diagnosed primary spine tumor in the adult Korean population, 2009-2011. 60:195–204, 201710.3340/jkns.2016.0505.01128264240)| false