1
|
Khalafallah AM, Rakovec M, Burapachaisri K, Fung S, Kozachik SL, Valappil B, Abou-Al-Shaar H, Wang EW, Snyderman CH, Zenonos GA, Gardner PA, Baskaya MK, Dornbos D, Choby G, Kuan EC, Roxbury C, Overdevest JB, Gudis DA, Lee VS, Levy JM, Thamboo A, Schlosser RJ, Huang J, Bettegowda C, London NR, Rowan NR, Wu AW, Mukherjee D. The Suprasellar Meningioma Patient-Reported Outcome Survey: a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure for resection of suprasellar meningioma. J Neurosurg 2021:1-9. [PMID: 34874673 DOI: 10.3171/2021.6.jns21517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Suprasellar meningioma resection via either the transcranial approach (TCA) or the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) is an area of controversy and active evaluation. Skull base surgeons increasingly consider patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when choosing an approach. No PRO measure currently exists to assess quality of life for suprasellar meningiomas. METHODS Adult patients undergoing suprasellar meningioma resection between 2013 and 2019 via EEA (n = 14) or TCA (n = 14) underwent semistructured interviews. Transcripts were coded using a grounded theory approach to identify themes as the basis for a PRO measure that includes all uniquely reported symptoms. To assess content validity, 32 patients and 15 surgeons used a Likert scale to rate the relevance of items on the resulting questionnaire and the general Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS29). The mean scores were calculated for all items and compared for TCA versus EEA patient cohorts by using unpaired t-tests. Items on either questionnaire with mean scores ≥ 2.0 from patients were considered meaningful and were aggregated to form the novel Suprasellar Meningioma Patient-Reported Outcome Survey (SMPRO) instrument. RESULTS Qualitative analyses resulted in 55 candidate items. Relative to patients who underwent the EEA, those who underwent the TCA reported significantly worse future outlook before surgery (p = 0.01), tiredness from medications 2 weeks after surgery (p = 0.001), and word-finding and memory difficulties 3 months after surgery (p = 0.05 and < 0.001, respectively). The items that patients who received a TCA were most concerned about included medication-induced lethargy after surgery (2.9 ± 1.3), blurry vision before surgery (2.7 ± 1.5), and difficulty reading due to blurry vision before surgery (2.7 ± 2.7). Items that patients who received an EEA were most concerned about included blurry vision before surgery (3.5 ± 1.3), difficulty reading due to blurry vision before surgery (2.4 ± 1.3), and problems with smell postsurgery (2.9 ± 1.3). Although surgeons overall overestimated how concerned patients were about questionnaire items (p < 0.0005), the greatest discrepancies between patient and surgeon relevance scores were for blurry vision pre- and postoperatively (p < 0.001 and < 0.001, respectively) and problems with taste postoperatively (p < 0.001). Seventeen meningioma-specific items were considered meaningful, supplementing 8 significant PROMIS29 items to create the novel 25-item SMPRO. CONCLUSIONS The authors developed a disease- and approach-specific measure for suprasellar meningiomas to compare quality of life by operative approach. If demonstrated to be reliable and valid in future studies, this instrument may assist patients and providers in choosing a personalized surgical approach. ABBREVIATIONS EEA = endoscopic endonasal approach; GTR = gross-total resection; PRO = patient-reported outcome; PROMIS29 = Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29; QOL = quality of life; SMPRO = Suprasellar Meningioma Patient-Reported Outcome Survey; TCA = transcranial approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Maureen Rakovec
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
| | | | - Shirley Fung
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Sharon L. Kozachik
- Medical University of South Carolina College of Nursing, Charleston, South Carolina
| | - Benita Valappil
- Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
| | - Hussam Abou-Al-Shaar
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Eric W. Wang
- Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
| | - Carl H. Snyderman
- Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
| | - Georgios A. Zenonos
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Paul A. Gardner
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Mustafa K. Baskaya
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Wisconsin–Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - David Dornbos
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Garrett Choby
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Edward C. Kuan
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Irvine, Orange, California
| | - Christopher Roxbury
- Department of Surgery, Section of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Chicago School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Jonathan B. Overdevest
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - David A. Gudis
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Illinois
| | - Victoria S. Lee
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Illinois
| | - Joshua M. Levy
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Rhinology and Anterior Skull Base, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Andrew Thamboo
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Rodney J, Schlosser
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
| | - Judy Huang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
| | - Chetan Bettegowda
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
| | - Nyall R. London
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Nicholas R. Rowan
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Albert W. Wu
- Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Debraj Mukherjee
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lu ZF, Cheng XB, Zhao YG, Shi BZ. Twenty-nine cases of resection of suprasellar meningioma through small bone window: an interhemispheric approach. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2013; 17:525-9. [PMID: 24592141 DOI: 10.5114/wo.2013.38913] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2012] [Revised: 06/14/2013] [Accepted: 10/16/2013] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim of the study The present study aims to discuss the value and the effect of resection of suprasellar meningioma through the interhemispheric approach. Material and methods Twenty-nine cases of patients with suprasellar meningioma diagnosed through enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and postoperative histopathological examination underwent resection of tumours (the largest diameter ranged from 3 cm to 6 cm) by the microsurgical technique of a small bone window (about 4 cm × 5 cm) through the interhemispheric approach. Results Among all cases, 25 (86%) (Simpson I, II) were of total resection of tumours and 4 were of subtotal resection of tumours. 19 (65%) were of improvement of vision and visual field, 2 (7%) were of postoperative diabetes insipidus, and 1 (3%) was of electrolyte imbalance. No operative death occurred. Conclusions The small bone window interhemispheric approach can be used to expose tumours, lightly stretch brain tissues, reduce the incidence of complications, and improve the total resection rate of tumours of patients with sellae meningiomas growing forward, upward, and into the sella.
Collapse
|
3
|
Tan A, Mallika P, Aziz S, Asok T, Intan G. The Importance of Ophthalmic Signs in the Diagnosis of Suprasellar Meningioma - a case report. Malays Fam Physician 2009; 4:26-29. [PMID: 25606155 PMCID: PMC4170371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
A forty-two year old lady presented with gradual, painless, progressive blurring of vision of her left eye for four months. There were no other associated ocular or systemic complaints. Examination showed decreased visual acuity in both eyes and a pale optic disc on the left side. Visual field examination revealed a temporal field defect of the right eye which aroused the suspicion of an intracranial mass lesion. MRI of her brain revealed a suprasellar meningioma. We would like to emphasize the importance of visual field examination of both eyes in patients presenting with unilateral loss of vision.
Collapse
|