Myrseth, Erling

OBJECTIVEPatient-reported outcomes are increasingly used in studies of vestibular schwannoma (VS); however, few studies have examined self-evaluated facial nerve function and its relation to physician-reported outcomes. The primary objective of this study was to compare patient self-evaluations of facial disability with physician-evaluated facial nerve status and with self-evaluations of a healthy control group. The second objective was to provide insight into the controversial subject of the optimal initial management of small- and medium-sized VSs; consequently, the authors compared patient-reported facial nerve disability following treatment via observation (OBS), Gamma Knife surgery (GKS), or microsurgery (MS). Lastly, the authors sought to identify risk factors for facial nerve dysfunction following treatment for small- and medium-sized VSs.METHODSAll patients with a VS 3 cm or smaller that was singly treated with OBS, GKS, or MS at either of 2 independent treatment centers between 1998 and 2008 were retrospectively identified. Longitudinal facial nerve measures and clinical data, including facial nerve evaluation according to the House-Brackmann (HB) grading system, were extracted from existing VS databases. Supplementing the objective data were Facial Disability Index (FDI) scores, which were obtained via survey of patients a mean of 7.7 years after initial treatment.RESULTSThe response rate among the 682 eligible patients was 79%; thus, data from a total of 539 patients were analyzed. One hundred forty-eight patients had been managed by OBS, 247 with GKS, and 144 with MS. Patients who underwent microsurgery had larger tumors and were younger than those who underwent OBS or GKS. Overall, facial nerve outcomes were satisfactory following treatment, with more than 90% of patients having HB Grade I function at the last clinical follow-up. Treatment was the major risk factor for facial nerve dysfunction. Almost one-fifth of the patients treated with MS had an objective decline in facial nerve function, whereas only 2% in the GKS group and 0% in the OBS cohort had a decline. The physical subscale of the FDI in the VS patients was highly associated with HB grade; however, the social/well-being subscale of the FDI was not. Thus, any social disability caused by facial palsy was not detectable by use of this questionnaire.CONCLUSIONSThe majority of patients with small- and medium-sized VSs attain excellent long-term facial nerve function and low facial nerve disability regardless of treatment modality. Tumor size and microsurgical treatment are risk factors for facial nerve dysfunction and self-reported disability. The FDI questionnaire is sensitive to the physical but not the social impairment associated with facial dysfunction.

Objectives/HypothesisTo evaluate outcomes of salvage surgery for vestibular schwannoma (VS) that failed primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).MethodsCase‐control study of 37 patients who underwent surgical resection of sporadic VS following prior SRS at two tertiary academic referral centers between 2003 and 2015. A cohort of nonirradiated control subjects, matched according to tumor size, age, and treatment center, were used as comparison.ResultsThirty‐seven patients were included. The median time from radiation to surgical salvage was 36 months (range 9.6–153 months). Following tumor progression after SRS, 18 (49%) patients underwent gross total resection, 10 (27%) underwent near‐total resection, and nine (24%) underwent subtotal resection. Postoperative complications following salvage surgery included one (3%) case of stroke, four (11%) cases of cerebrospinal fluid leak, and two (5%) cases of meningitis. Twenty‐seven (73%) patients had good postoperative facial nerve outcome (House‐Brackmann Score I–II) at long‐term follow‐up. There were no cases of tumor recurrence or regrowth after a median length of 26 months following microsurgical salvage (range 3–114 months). The rate of satisfactory postoperative facial nerve function was not different between study and control subjects (73% vs. 76%; P = 0.8); however, less‐than‐complete resection was utilized more frequently among previously radiated patients (P = 0.01).ConclusionMicrosurgical salvage of VS following primary radiation therapy is challenging. Less‐than‐complete resection is required in a greater percentage of patients to preserve facial nerve integrity and prevent neurological complications. Long‐term follow‐up is needed to determine the risk of delayed progression following incomplete tumor removal.Level of Evidence3b. Laryngoscope, 126:2580–2586, 2016

OBJECT The optimal treatment for sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) is highly controversial. To date, the majority of studies comparing treatment modalities have focused on a narrow scope of technical outcomes including facial function, hearing status, and tumor control. Very few publications have investigated health-related quality of life (HRQOL) differences between individual treatment groups, and none have used a disease-specific HRQOL instrument. METHODS All patients with sporadic small- to medium-sized VSs who underwent primary microsurgery, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), or observation between 1998 and 2008 were identified. Subjects were surveyed via postal questionnaire using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System short form (PROMIS-10), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), and the Penn Acoustic Neuroma Quality-of-Life (PANQOL) scale. Additionally, a pool of general population adults was surveyed, providing a nontumor control group for comparison. RESULTS A total of 642 respondents were analyzed. The overall response rate for patients with VS was 79%, and the mean time interval between treatment and survey was 7.7 years. Using multivariate regression, there were no statistically significant differences between management groups with respect to the PROMIS-10 physical or mental health dimensions, the SF-36 Physical or Mental Component Summary scores, or the PANQOL general, anxiety, hearing, or energy subdomains. Patients who underwent SRS or observation reported a better total PANQOL score and higher PANQOL facial, balance, and pain subdomain scores than the microsurgical cohort (p < 0.02). The differences in scores between the nontumor control group and patients with VS were greater than differences observed between individual treatment groups for the majority of measures. CONCLUSIONS The differences in HRQOL outcomes following SRS, observation, and microsurgery for VS are small. Notably, the diagnosis of VS rather than treatment strategy most significantly impacts quality of life. Understanding that a large number of VSs do not grow following discovery, and that intervention does not confer a long-term HRQOL advantage, small- and medium-sized VS should be initially observed, while intervention should be reserved for patients with unequivocal tumor growth or intractable symptoms that are amenable to treatment. Future studies assessing HRQOL in VS patients should prioritize use of validated disease-specific measures, such as the PANQOL, given the significant limitations of generic instruments in distinguishing between treatment groups and tumor versus nontumor subjects.