1
|
Foramen magnum meningiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Rev 2021; 44:2583-2596. [PMID: 33507444 PMCID: PMC8490226 DOI: 10.1007/s10143-021-01478-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2020] [Revised: 12/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Foramen magnum meningiomas (FMMs) account for 1.8–3.2% of all meningiomas. With this systematic review and meta-analysis, our goal is to detail epidemiology, clinical features, surgical aspects, and outcomes of this rare pathology. Using PRISMA 2015 guidelines, we reviewed case series, mixed series, or retrospective observational cohorts with description of surgical technique, patient and lesion characteristics, and pre- and postoperative clinical status. A meta-analysis was performed to search for correlations between meningioma characteristics and rate of gross total resection (GTR). We considered 33 retrospective studies or case series, including 1053 patients, mostly females (53.8%), with a mean age of 52 years. The mean follow-up was of 51 months (range 0–258 months). 65.6% of meningiomas were anterior, and the mean diameter was of 29 mm, treated with different surgical approaches. Postoperatively, 17.2% suffered complications (both surgery- and non-surgery-related) and 2.5% had a recurrence. The Karnofsky performance score improved in average after surgical treatment (75 vs. 81, p < 0.001). Our meta-analysis shows significant rates of GTR in cohorts with a majority of posterior and laterally located FMM (p = 0.025) and with a mean tumor less than 25 mm (p < 0.05). FMM is a rare and challenging pathology whose treatment should be multidisciplinary, focusing on quality of life. Surgery still remains the gold standard and aim at maximal resection with neurological function preservation. Adjuvant therapies are needed in case of subtotal removal, non-grade I lesions, or recurrence. Specific risk factors for recurrence, other than Simpson grading, need further research.
Collapse
|
2
|
Li D, Wu Z, Ren C, Hao SY, Wang L, Xiao XR, Tang J, Wang YG, Meng GL, Zhang LW, Zhang JT. Foramen magnum meningiomas: surgical results and risks predicting poor outcomes based on a modified classification. J Neurosurg 2016; 126:661-676. [PMID: 27177171 DOI: 10.3171/2016.2.jns152873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate neurological function and progression/recurrence (P/R) outcome of foramen magnum meningioma (FMM) based on a modified classification. METHODS This study included 185 consecutive patients harboring FMMs (mean age 49.4 years; 124 females). The authors classified the FMMs into 4 types according to the previous classification of Bruneau and George as follows: Type A (n = 49, 26.5%), the dural attachment of the lesion grows below the vertebral artery (VA); Type B (n = 39, 21.1%), the dural attachment of the lesion grows above the VA; Type C1 (n = 84, 45.4%), the VA courses across the lesion with or without VA encasement or large lesions grow both above and below the bilateral VA; and Type C2 (n = 13, 7.0%), Type C1 plus partial/total encasement of the VA and extradural growth. RESULTS The median preoperative Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score was 80. Gross-total resection (GTR) was achieved in 154 patients (83.2%). Lower cranial nerve morbidity was lowest in Type A lesions (16.3%). Type C2 lesions were inherently larger (p = 0.001), had a greater percentage of ventrolateral location (p = 0.009) and VA encasement (p < 0.001), lower GTR rate (p < 0.001), longer surgical duration (p = 0.015), higher morbidity (38.5%), higher P/R rate (30.8%, p = 0.009), and poorer recent KPS score compared with other types. After a mean follow-up duration of 110.3 months, the most recent follow-up data were obtained in 163 patients (88.1%). P/R was observed in 13 patients (7.2%). The median follow-up KPS score was 90. Compared with preoperative status, recent neurological status was improved in 91 (49.2%), stabilized in 76 (41.1%), and worsened in 18 (9.7%) patients. The multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model demonstrated Type C2 (HR 3.94, 95% CI 1.04-15.0, p = 0.044), nontotal resection (HR 6.30, 95% CI 1.91-20.8, p = 0.003), and pathological mitosis (HR 7.11, 95% CI 1.96-25.8, p = 0.003) as independent adverse predictors for tumor P/R. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified nontotal resection (OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.16-14.2, p = 0.029) and pathological mitosis (OR 6.29, 95% CI 1.47-27.0, p = 0.013) as independent risks for poor outcome (KPS score < 80). CONCLUSIONS The modified classification helped to predict surgical outcome and P/R in addition to the position of the lower cranial nerves. Preoperative imaging studies and neurological function should be reviewed carefully to establish an individualized management strategy to improve long-term outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Da Li
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.,China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases.,Center of Brain Tumor, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders; and.,Beijing Key Laboratory of Brain Tumor, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhen Wu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.,China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases.,Center of Brain Tumor, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders; and.,Beijing Key Laboratory of Brain Tumor, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Cong Ren
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.,China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases.,Center of Brain Tumor, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders; and.,Beijing Key Laboratory of Brain Tumor, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Shu-Yu Hao
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Liang Wang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Xin-Ru Xiao
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Jie Tang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Yong-Gang Wang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Guo-Lu Meng
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Li-Wei Zhang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.,China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases.,Center of Brain Tumor, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders; and.,Beijing Key Laboratory of Brain Tumor, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Jun-Ting Zhang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.,China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases.,Center of Brain Tumor, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders; and.,Beijing Key Laboratory of Brain Tumor, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|