|
|
 |
Treatment
Acoustic
Neuroma Treatment
neuroma can include surgery vs. radiosurgery
As discussed below, the therapeutic options for acoustic neuromas include
observation, surgery and radiosurgery. The optimal treatment varies according
to whether the tumor is large or small, whether it has caused neurologic damage
prior to treatment and on patient factors.
Because acoustic neuromas are usually slow-growing, immediate intervention
is not always necessary. For patients with very small, asymptomatic tumors,
elderly patients, and patients with serious medical problems, a conservative
approach with observation including serial MRI studies may be reasonable. Considering
the Options
The options for the treatment
of the acoustic neuromas include surgery and radiosurgery. Our approach
to surgery for
acoustic neuromas is based on the Johns Hopkins experience of nearly 100
years of surgery of the brain. Experience with this type of surgery appears
to be essential in minimizing the risk of complications as acoustic neuromas.
With a high level of experience has come an understanding of the technical
aspects of exposing the tumor, removing the tumor, and closing the surgical
site in a way that minimizes neurological deficits and promotes a return
to usual activities.
Thousands of patients have received radiation treatment for acoustic neuromas,
several hundred at Johns Hopkins. Radiosurgery is a non-invasive treatment
that uses precisely focused, narrow beams of radiation to both treat the
acoustic neuroma and to reduce the dose of radiation delivered to the surrounding
tissues including the hearing, balance and facial neves.
Considerations in Choice of Treatment
Controversy exists regarding the optimal form of treatment for the acoustic
neuromas. Small tumors that do not pose a risk to brain function and do not produce
symptoms, may be watched with follow-up MRI scans to insure "control".
This is most often an attractive option in older individuals with small tumors.
When treatment is needed, however, the patient and their family should strive
to understand the options for treatment, including the success rates, potential
complications, and implications for follow-up. In some cases a patient’s
age, or the size of the acoustic neuroma will hold sway in determining our recommendations
for treatment. In other cases, the final decision will be left to a patient and
their family. In making a final decision, knowledge is key.
For both surgery and radiotherapy approaches to acoustic neuroma treatment,
the important issues in the treatment of the acoustic neuromas are preservation
of the facial nerve, preservation of hearing and control of the tumor. "Control
of the tumor" is a phrase that should be considered carefully.
Currently, long term follow-up after treatment that documents a high cure rate
is only available for surgical removal, and only when the vast majority of
the tumor is completely resected. (There is a suggestion that small "flecks" of
tumor may be left without risk of regrowth, but significant portions of the
tumor left behind present a significant risk of regrowth). In some cases, however,
radiation treatment of the tumor may be an option. With radiation treatment,
however, tumor control can only be insured with repeated scans, each year,
for life. Few studies to date have documented the effects of radiation beyond
5 years. Moreover, there now exist several reports of malignancies (cancers)
developing within the field of radiation treatment for acoustic neuroma. These
observations underscore the need for ongoing follow-up of approaches to acoustic
neuroma that involve radiation therapy.
Microsurgical resection of acoustic neuromas can be accomplished using
one of three operative approaches.
Microsurgical resection of acoustic neuromas can be accomplished through
three different operative approaches to the tumor. Traditionally the suboccipital
approach has offered preservation of hearing and preservation of seventh (facial)
nerve function. The success rates with hearing preservation are inversely related
to tumor size (large acoustic neuromas have worse results). Hearing preservation
after surgery for acoustic neuroma varies between reported groups of patients.
However, a general rule is that roughly half of patients with small tumors who
have useful hearing prior to surgery will maintain useful hearing following surgery.
The skull base team may favor the translabyrinthine approach for removal of
the acoustic neuroma as it offers early visualization of the seventh nerve.
This approach results, however, in complete loss of ipsilateral hearing in
virtually all patients.
The middle fossa approach has been used for small intracanalicular acoustic
neuromas in patients with intact hearing. This approach, however, may have
a higher incidence of seventh nerve palsy than for the suboccipital approach,
particularly if the tumor lies in a low, dependent position within the internal
auditory canal.
The
surgery of acoustic neuroma has been aided by technological advances
Intraoperative monitoring of brain and nerve function is now routinely
performed with all surgical procedures for the resection of acoustic neuromas
at Johns Hopkins. A team of neurologists and electrophysiologists is dedicated
to detecting any changes in the ability of nerves in the area of surgery,
as well as the brain, to normally conduct electrical impulses. Such changes
can signal the need to change the strategy of dissection, thereby enabling
the surgery to proceed while avoiding neurologic complications.
Image-guided surgery brings together the skills of experienced surgeons
with 2- and 3-dimensional images of the skull base obtained using CT or
MRI scans. Graphic displays in the operating room link those images to
the sterile instruments used by the surgeons, so that the instrument tips
in real space also appear in the virtual space of the CT or MRI images.
The virtual surgical field allows the surgeon to predict what lies ahead,
to avoid damaging vital structures, and to assure complete tumor removal.
Surgery for Acoustic Neuromas: Surgical Results
Facial Nerve (Facial Strength) Preservation
Most modern surgical series report complete tumor removal with both anatomic
and functional preservation of the facial nerve in over 90% of patients
having surgery for the acoustic neuromas (Buchman CA, Chen DA, Flannagan
P, Wilberger JE, Maroon JC. The learning curve for acoustic tumor surgery.
Laryngoscope 1996;106:1406-1411; Sampath P. Facial nerve injury in acoustic
neuroma (vestibular schwannoma) surgery: etiology and prevention. J Neurosurg
1997;87:60-66.)
• A study of a large number of patients treated by the current skull
base team at Johns Hopkins was reported by Sampath et. al. (Sampath P,
Brem H, Holliday MJ, Niparko J, Long DM. Facial nerve injury in acoustic
neuroma (vestibular schwannoma) surgery: etiology and prevention. J Neurosurg
1997;87:60-66). This report provides an analysis of 611 patients surgically
treated for acoustic neuroma between 1973 and 1994. In the immediate postoperative
period, 62.1% of patients displayed normal or near-normal facial nerve
function (House-Brackmann Grade 1 or 2) after surgery for acoustic neuromas.
This number rose to 85.3% of patients at 6 months after surgery. The surgical
approach to the acoustic neuroma appeared to have no effect on the incidence
of facial nerve injury. That is, patients having the suboccipital, translabyrinthine
or middle fossa approach appeared to have similar rates facial nerve preservation.
•
Gormley et. al. (Gormley WB, Sekhar LN, Wright DC, Kamerer D, Schessel
D. Acoustic neuromas: results of current surgical management of acoustic
neuroma. Neurosurgery 1997;41:50-58; discussion 58-60.) reported the preservation
of postoperative facial nerve function and showed preserved function (House
Brackman grade I or II [11]) in 96% of small tumors (less than 2 cm diameter),
74% of medium tumors (2.0 - 3.9 cm), and 38% of large tumors (4.0 cm and
greater). Further, a "fair" postoperative function (Grade III
or IV) was achieved in 4% of small tumors, 26% of medium tumors, and 58%
of large tumors. Other studies have corroborated this inverse relationship
between size of the tumor and preservation of the facial nerve function
(Lalwani AK, Butt FY, Jackler RK, Pitts LH, Yingling CD. Facial nerve outcome
after acoustic neuroma surgery: a study from the era of cranial nerve monitoring.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;111:561-570.).
• One development that has served to reduce the rate of complications
with surgical removal of acoustic neuromas is monitoring the status of
the facial nerve continuously throughout the surgical procedure. Electrophysiologic
monitoring offers feedback to the surgeon, allowing for nerve indentification,
delineation of its course, and preservation of the nerve trunk by signaling
disturbances in the nerve's activity before injury occurs. In an early
report of the value of continuous intraoperative monitoring of the facial
nerve (Niparko & Kileny: Neurophysiologic Intraoperative Monitoring:
II. Facial Nerve Function. American J of Otology, 1989, 10:55-71) demonstrated
that longterm rates of unsatisfactory facial nerve function were reduced
from 7% to 3% with the use of intraoperative monitoring.
Surgery: Hearing Preservation
• The preservation of hearing following surgery has traditionally presented
a greater challenge than facial nerve presentation. The precise reason
for this difference is unclear. That is, the surgical removal of acoustic
neuromas treats the facial and hearing nerves gently and with equal surgical
care. However, whereas facial nerve preservation of facial function ranges
in the high 90% range, hearing preservation ranges from 30 to 50% following
the retrosigmoid approach (Gormley WB, Sekhar LN, Wright DC, Kamerer D,
Schessel D. Acoustic neuromas: results of current surgical management.
Neurosurgery 1997;41:50-58; discussion 58-60.). In this series, functional
hearing preservation defined as Gardner-Robertson Class I or II was achieved
in 48% of small tumors and only 25% of medium tumors. Hearing was not preserved
in that series in any of the patients with large tumors in whom hearing
preservation was attempted.
•
Cerullo et. al. (Cerullo, Grutsch, Heiferman, Osterdock. The preservation
of hearing and facial nerve function in a consecutive series of unilateral
vestibular nerve schwannoma surgical patients (acoustic neuroma). Surg
Neurol 1993;39:485-493.) showed that for the 64 patients with functional
preoperative hearing, 13 patients retained hearing postoperatively: five
had normal hearing (PTA < 25 dB, SD > 70%), five had near normal
hearing (PTA < 45 dB, SD > 70%), four patients had preserved hearing
(PTA < 50 dB, SD > 50%), and three patients had preserved cochlear
nerve function (PTA > 50 dB, SD < 50%) after surgery.
Surgery: Control of Growth
• The rates of control following surgery are high and generally
exceed 95% (Buchman, Chen, Flannagan, Wilberger, Maroon. The learning
curve for acoustic tumor surgery. Laryngoscope 1996;106:1406-1411) in
most surgical services. The Johns Hopkins experience indicates a 99.1%
tumor control with over 8 years’ average follow-up (Sampath P, Holliday
MJ, Brem H, Niparko JK, Long DM. Facial nerve injury in acoustic neuroma
(vestibular schwannoma) surgery: etiology and prevention. J Neurosurg
1997;87:60-66.)
Surgery: CSF Leak
To review complications that occur during the course of acoustic neuroma
surgery a retrospective case review was published (Otol Neurotol 2001 Nov;22(6):895-902
Perioperative morbidity of acoustic neuroma surgery.
Slattery WH 3rd, Francis
S, House KC). A series of 1,687 patients undergoing acoustic neuroma surgery
between 1987 and 1997 included 822 male and 865 female patients ranging
in age from 10 to 87 years (mean age at time of surgery, 50 yr; standard
deviation, 14 yr). The most common surgical approach was translabyrinthine
(72.5%), followed by middle fossa (25.7%).
The tumors ranged in size from
3 to 7 cm in diameter (mean, 2.0 cm). The main outcome was the frequency
of occurrence of all surgical and medical complications. The most common
complications were cerebrospinal fluid leaks (9.4% though only 2.1% required
a surgical repair of the leak as the remainder healed spontaneously) and
meningitis (1.5%). The authors conclude that the findings of this study
provide a basis for comparison with other treatment approaches and also
are useful for preoperative patient counseling.
The surgical removal of Acoustic Neuromas that grow after radiotherapy
presents a unique set of challenges. Acoustic neuromas that grow despite
radiotherapy present either as active growth demonstrated on MRI scans
(after radiation) or neurologic deficits, particularly facial muscle weakness
and spasm that slowly worsens. In such cases, repeated radiation is not
thought to be safe and surgical removal may be required.
A recent study based at Johns Hopkins documented the experience of removing
acoustic neuromas that grow after radiation therapy (Lee, Westra, Staecker,
Long, Niparko: Clinical and histopathological features of recurrent acoustic
neuroma following stereotactic radiosurgery. Otology & Neurotology,
in press, 2003). As stereotactic radiosurgery for acoustic neuroma entails
uncertain long term risk with regard to growth potential and function of
adjacent cranial nerves, these authors evaluated the clinical course and
characteristics of the tumors in four cases of tumor growth after radiotherapy
treated surgically in 2001. All four patients underwent microsurgical resection
of VS following primary stereotactic radiation therapy. The report notes
that highly inconsistent radiation changes in areas surrounding the regrown
tumor were found. Fibrosis outside and within the tumor bed varied markedly,
complicating microsurgical dissection of the tumor from adjacent nerves.
Once resected the tumors were evaluated for their cellular architecture.
Viable tumor was present in all cases. Despite the scarring of the areas
surrounding the tumor, there was no significant scarring or other changes
within the tumor. That is, for unknown reasons, these tumors appeared unaffected
by the prior radiation treatment. It may be that "pockets" of
the tumor evaded the effects of the radiation and gave rise to recurrent
growth. The report noted variable scarring surrounding the tumor and a
lack of radiation change within the tumor--suggesting that a uniform treatment
effect was not achieved in these cases. Although all four patients had
preoperative facial nerve weakness that was worsening and/or had expanding
tumors on MR scan, excellent preservation of facial nerve anatomy and function
was possible. The authors concluded that additional analyses are needed
to clarify the effects of radiotherapy on acoustic neuromas.
|