Borsetto, Daniele

Objective: To characterize patient outcomes after primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the management of sporadic facial nerve schwannoma. Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Six tertiary referral centers across the United States and United Kingdom. Patients: Adults undergoing SRS from 2000 through 2023 for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma along any segment of the facial nerve were included. Patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis were excluded. Intervention: Stereotactic radiosurgery. Main outcome measure: Long-term tumor control. Results: Among 60 patients meeting inclusion, the median age at SRS was 52 years (IQR: 41 to 64) with a median tumor size of 19.5 mm (IQR: 14.7 to 22.8). Tumors commonly involved the internal auditory canal (73%), cisternal (49%), geniculate/labyrinthine (47%), and tympanic segments (22%). Two patients experienced SRS failure and underwent salvage treatment; salvage-free survival rates (95% CI; number still at risk) at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years after SRS were 100% (100 to 100; 55), 100% (100 to 100; 36), 100% (100 to 100; 18), and 87% (72 to 100; 9), respectively. Among 31 (52%) patients with House-Brackmann (HB) grade I facial function at presentation, only 6 demonstrated worse facial function at a median of 3.2 years (IQR: 1.7 to 6.6) after SRS. Of 18 patients with serviceable hearing (AAO-HNS class A/B) at SRS, 13 maintained serviceable hearing at a median of 1.0 years (IQR: 0.5 to 4.9) of post-SRS audiometric follow-up. Conclusions: Durable tumor control after primary SRS for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma is achieved in most patients. Among those with HB grade I facial function at presentation, treatment with SRS harbors limited additional risk of facial paresis beyond observation alone.

Importance In the literature, there is a lack of data reporting tumor control rates after radiotherapy in actively growing vestibular schwannomas (VS). Data for this rarely studied population are needed. Objective To estimate tumor control rates in radiologically growing VS treated with first-line radiotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants This international, multicenter cohort study used prospectively collected data from patients with growing unilateral VS treated first-line with radiotherapy between January 2000 and December 2023 from 8 tertiary referral skull base units. The data were analyzed in June 2025. Exposures Radiotherapy as an initial treatment for VS. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was treatment failure, ie VS growth postradiotherapy, which was predefined as an increase in maximum intracranial tumor diameter (ICTD) of 3 mm or greater within the first 2 years after radiotherapy or 2 mm or greater thereafter. Secondary outcomes were treatment failure based on different definitions of VS growth: (1) an increase in ICTD of 2 mm or greater, (2) an increase in ICTD of 3 mm or greater, and (3) conversion to surgery. Results A total of 1883 patients (975 female individuals [51.8%]; median age at diagnosis, 63 years [IQR, 53-71 years]) were included in the study. Using the primary definition of treatment failure (an increase in ICTD of ≥3 mm within the first 2 years postradiotherapy or ≥2 mm thereafter), the Kaplan-Meier estimate yielded a 10-year tumor control rate of 76.1% (95% CI, 72.7%-79.2%). For secondary outcome definitions, 10-year tumor control rates were 60.1% (95% CI, 57.5%-64.3%) for an ICTD increase of 2 mm or greater, 78.3% (95% CI, 75.0%-81.2%) for an increase of 3 mm or greater, and 92.6% (95% CI, 90.4%-94.3%) for conversion to surgery. Neither pretreatment tumor size nor tumor location (intracanalicular vs extracanalicular) were significantly associated with treatment failure. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this cohort study provide tumor control outcomes for radiologically growing VS treated with radiotherapy using several clinically relevant definitions of growth. By focusing exclusively on this rarely isolated subgroup, the findings offer targeted data to potentially inform treatment expectations and future research.

Objective To examine the quality of information provided by artificial intelligence platforms ChatGPT-4 and Claude 2 surrounding the management of vestibular schwannomas. Study design Cross-sectional. Setting Skull base surgeons were involved from different centers and countries. Intervention Thirty-six questions regarding vestibular schwannoma management were tested. Artificial intelligence responses were subsequently evaluated by 19 lateral skull base surgeons using the Quality Assessment of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI) questionnaire, assessing “Accuracy,” “Clarity,” “Relevance,” “Completeness,” “Sources,” and “Usefulness.” Main Outcome Measure The scores of the answers from both chatbots were collected and analyzed using the Student t test. Analysis of responses grouped by stakeholders was performed with McNemar test. Stuart-Maxwell test was used to compare reading level among chatbots. Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated. Results ChatGPT-4 demonstrated significantly improved quality over Claude 2 in 14 of 36 (38.9%) questions, whereas higher-quality scores for Claude 2 were only observed in 2 (5.6%) answers. Chatbots exhibited variation across the dimensions of “Accuracy,” “Clarity,” “Completeness,” “Relevance,” and “Usefulness,” with ChatGPT-4 demonstrating a statistically significant superior performance. However, no statistically significant difference was found in the assessment of “Sources.” Additionally, ChatGPT-4 provided information at a significant lower reading grade level. Conclusions Artificial intelligence platforms failed to consistently provide accurate information surrounding the management of vestibular schwannoma, although ChatGPT-4 achieved significantly higher scores in most analyzed parameters. These findings demonstrate the potential for significant misinformation for patients seeking information through these platforms.

ABSTRACT Over the past two decades, there has been increasing interest in the diagnosis and management of schwannomas of the inner ear including hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implants. However, tumor nomenclature and classification within the literature have been variable and oftentimes cumbersome. The term “intralabyrinthine schwannoma” is in common use when describing these tumors but is a potential source of confusion given that people often use the term “labyrinth” or “labyrinthine” to refer to the vestibular component of the inner ear only (i.e., labyrinthectomy or the translabyrinthine approach). During the Ninth Quadrennial Conference on Vestibular Schwannoma and Other Cerebellopontine Angle Lesions in Bergen, Norway, in May 2023, a multidisciplinary group of conference participants met and discussed issues pertaining to current terminology and classifications to enhance clarity and to reflect recent advances in tumor management and hearing rehabilitation. Although a variety of terms have been previously used to describe inner ear schwannomas, consensus was achieved on the term “inner ear schwannoma (IES)” to describe eighth nerve schwannomas of the cochlea, vestibule, or semicircular canals. Subgroups under this term comprise intravestibular, intracochlear, or intravestibulocochlear inner ear schwannomas (low complexity tumors), inner ear schwannomas with transfundal extension into the internal auditory canal but without modiolar involvement (intermediate complexity tumors), and inner ear schwannomas with transfundal extension with modiolar involvement (high complexity tumors). The details of the recommendations for an updated and simplified tumor nomenclature centered around tumor control and hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implantation are presented.

Abstract Background Sinonasal malignancies with orbital invasion have dismal prognosis even when treated with orbital exenteration (OE). Sugawara et al. developed a surgical strategy called “extended‐OE (EOE),” showing encouraging outcomes. We hypothesized that a similar resection is achievable under endoscopic guidance through the exenterated orbit (endoscopic‐EOE). Methods The study was conducted in three institutions: University of Vienna; Mayo Clinic; University of Insubria; 48 orbital dissections were performed. A questionnaire was developed to evaluate feasibility and safety of each step, scoring from 1 to 10, (“impossible” to “easy,” and “high risk” to “low risk,” respectively), most likely complication(s) were hypothesized. Results The step‐by‐step technique is thoroughly described. The questionnaire was answered by 25 anterior skull base surgeons from six countries. Mean, median, range, and interquartile range of both feasibility and safety scores are reported. Conclusions Endoscopic‐EOE is a challenging but feasible procedure. Clinical validation is required to assess real‐life outcomes.

Purpose of review The purpose of this review is to outline the temporal bone management of external and middle ear carcinoma. The review will outline the current evidence involved in deciding which surgical approach to take, as well as new advances in auditory rehabilitation and immunotherapy. Recent findings Traditional surgical approaches include lateral temporal bone resection, subtotal temporal bone resection and total temporal bone resection. They can also involve parotidectomy and neck dissection depending on extension of disease into these areas. Options for auditory rehabilitation include osseointegrated hearing aids, transcutaneous bone-conduction implants, and active middle ear implants. Recent advances in immunotherapy have included the use of anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies. Summary The mainstay of management of temporal bone disease involves surgical resection. Early-stage tumours classified according to the Pittsburgh staging tool can often be treated with lateral temporal bone resection, whereas late-stage tumours might need subtotal or total temporal bone resection. Parotidectomy and neck dissection might also be indicated if there is a risk of occult regional disease. Recent advances in immunotherapy have been promising, particularly around anti-PD-1 inhibitors. However, larger clinical trials will be required to test the extent of efficacy, particularly around combination use with surgery.