Kerezoudis, Panagiotis

Abstract Background The management of pineal parenchymal tumors remains controversial. Methods The 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was queried for cases (age >3 years) with histologically confirmed pineal parenchymal tumors of intermediate differentiation (PPTID, n = 90) or pineoblastoma (n = 106). Results Within the PPTID group, median age was 41 years; 49% were males. Five- and 10-year survival were 83% and 78%, respectively. Adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy were administered in 64% and 17% patients, respectively. The effect of radiation with or without chemotherapy (HR 1.15, P = .81, and HR 1.31, P = .72, respectively), and extent of resection (HR = 1.07, P = .93) was not significant. Within the pineoblastoma group, median age was 25 years; 51% were males. Five- and 10-year survival were 66% and 42%, respectively. Adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy were administered in 72% and 51%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, patients with pineoblastoma who received both radiation and chemotherapy (n = 39) had significantly lower hazard of death (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14-0.85, P = .02) compared to those who received radiation alone (n = 20) or no adjuvant treatment (n = 19). Finally, females in the pineoblastoma group were found to have a lower hazard of death compared to males (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58, P = .001); this comparison trended toward statistical significance in the PPTID subgroup (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.14-1.08, P = .07). Conclusions Survival rates were higher in patients with PPTID vs patients with pineoblastoma. Adjuvant chemoradiation was associated with improved survival in pineoblastoma and females had lower hazards of death. Further research should identify specific patient profiles and molecular subgroups more likely to benefit from multimodality therapy.

OBJECTIVE Epilepsy originating from the central lobule (i.e., the primary sensorimotor cortex) is a challenging entity to treat given its involvement of eloquent cortex. The objective of this study was to review available evidence on treatment options for central lobule epilepsy. METHODS A comprehensive literature search (PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus) was conducted for studies (1990 to date) investigating postoperative outcomes for central lobule epilepsy. The primary and secondary endpoints were seizure freedom at last follow-up and postoperative neurological deficit, respectively. The following procedures were included: open resection, multiple subpial transections (MSTs), laser and radiofrequency ablation, deep brain stimulation (DBS), responsive neurostimulation (RNS), and continuous subthreshold cortical stimulation (CSCS). RESULTS A total of 52 studies and 504 patients were analyzed. Most evidence was based on open resection, yielding a total of 400 patients (24 studies), of whom 62% achieved seizure freedom at a mean follow-up of 48 months. A new or worsened motor deficit occurred in 44% (permanent in 19%). Forty-six patients underwent MSTs, of whom 16% achieved seizure freedom and 30% had a neurological deficit (permanent in 12%). There were 6 laser ablation cases (cavernomas in 50%) with seizure freedom in 4 patients and 1 patient with temporary motor deficit. There were 5 radiofrequency ablation cases, with 1 patient achieving seizure freedom, 2 patients each with Engel class III and IV outcomes, and 2 patients with motor deficit. The mean seizure frequency reduction at the last follow-up was 79% for RNS (28 patients), 90% for CSCS (15 patients), and 73% for DBS (4 patients). There were no cases of temporary or permanent neurological deficit in the CSCS or DBS group. CONCLUSIONS This review highlights the safety and efficacy profile of resection, ablation, and stimulation for refractory central lobe epilepsy. Resection of localized regions of epilepsy onset zones results in good rates of seizure freedom (62%); however, nearly 20% of patients had permanent motor deficits. The authors hope that this review will be useful to providers and patients when tailoring decision-making for this intricate pathology.

OBJECTIVE Although it has been shown that surgery for glioblastoma (GBM) at high-volume facilities (HVFs) may be associated with better postoperative outcomes, the use of such hospitals may not be equally distributed. The authors aimed to evaluate racial and socioeconomic differences in access to surgery for GBM at high-volume Commission on Cancer (CoC)–accredited hospitals. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with GBM that was newly diagnosed between 2004 and 2015. Patients who received no surgical intervention or those who received surgical intervention at a site other than the reporting facility were excluded. Annual surgical case volume was calculated for each hospital, with volume ≥ 90th percentile defined as an HVF. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify patient-level predictors for undergoing surgery at an HVF. Furthermore, multiple subgroup analyses were performed to determine the adjusted odds ratio of the likelihood of undergoing surgery at an HVF in 2016 as compared to 2004 for each patient subpopulation (by age, race, sex, educational group, etc.). RESULTS A total of 51,859 patients were included, with 10.7% (n = 5562) undergoing surgery at an HVF. On multivariable analysis, Hispanic White patients (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.49–0.69, p < 0.001) were found to have significantly lower odds of undergoing surgery at an HVF (reference = non-Hispanic White). In addition, patients from a rural residential location (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.72, p < 0.001; reference = metropolitan); patients with nonprivate insurance status (Medicare [OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71–0.86, p < 0.001], Medicaid [OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.60–0.78, p < 0001], other government insurance [OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52–0.86, p = 0.002], or who were uninsured [OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.51–0.72, p < 0.001]); and lower-income patients ($50,354–$63,332 [OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.63–0.74, p < 0.001], $40,227–$50,353 [OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76–0.92, p < 0.001]; reference = ≥ $63,333) were also found to be significantly associated with a lower likelihood of surgery at an HVF. Subgroup analyses revealed that elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years), both male and female patients and non-Hispanic White patients, and those with private insurance, Medicare, metropolitan residential location, median zip code–level household income in the first and second quartiles, and educational attainment in the first and third quartiles had increased odds of undergoing surgery at an HVF in 2016 compared to 2004 (all p ≤ 0.05). On the other hand, patients with other governmental insurance, patients with a rural residence, and those from a non-White racial category did not show a significant difference in odds of surgery at an HVF over time (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The present analysis from the National Cancer Database revealed significant disparities in access to surgery at an HVF for GBM within the United States. Furthermore, there was evidence that these racial and socioeconomic disparities may have widened between 2004 and 2016. The findings should assist health policy makers in the development of strategies for improving access to HVFs for racially and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations.

OBJECTIVE The prevalence of epilepsy in the older adult population is increasing. While surgical intervention in younger patients is supported by level I evidence, the safety and efficacy of epilepsy surgery in older individuals is less well established. The aim of this study was to evaluate seizure freedom rates and surgical outcomes in older epilepsy patients. METHODS The authors’ institutional electronic database was queried for patients older than 50 who had undergone epilepsy surgery during 2002–2018. Cases were grouped into 50–59, 60–69, and 70+ years old. Seizure freedom at the last follow-up constituted the primary outcome of interest. The institutional analysis was supplemented by a literature review and meta-analysis (random effects model) of all published studies on this topic as well as by an analysis of complication rates, mortality rates, and cost data from a nationwide administrative database (Vizient Inc., years 2016–2019). RESULTS A total of 73 patients (n = 16 for 50–59 years, n = 47 for 60–69, and n = 10 for 70+) were treated at the authors’ institution. The median age was 63 years, and 66% of the patients were female. At a median follow-up of 24 months, seizure freedom was 73% for the overall cohort, 63% for the 50–59 group, 77% for the 60–69 group, and 70% for the 70+ group. The literature search identified 15 additional retrospective studies (474 cases). Temporal lobectomy was the most commonly performed procedure (73%), and mesial temporal sclerosis was the most common pathology (52%), followed by nonspecific gliosis (19%). The pooled mean follow-up was 39 months (range 6–114.8 months) with a pooled seizure freedom rate of 65% (95% CI 59%–72%). On multivariable meta-regression analysis, an older mean age at surgery (coefficient [coeff] 2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.1, p < 0.001) and the presence of mesial temporal sclerosis (coeff 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–0.6, p = 0.015) were the most important predictors of seizure freedom. Finally, analysis of the Vizient database revealed mortality rates of 0.5%, 1.1%, and 9.6%; complication rates of 7.1%, 10.1%, and 17.3%; and mean hospital costs of $31,977, $34,586, and $40,153 for patients aged 50–59, 60–69, and 70+ years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS While seizure-free outcomes of epilepsy surgery are excellent, there is an expected increase in morbidity and mortality with increasing age. Findings in this study on the safety and efficacy of epilepsy surgery in the older population may serve as a useful guide during preoperative decision-making and patient counseling.

OBJECTIVE Reduction of Meyerding grade is often performed during fusion for spondylolisthesis. Although radiographic appearance may improve, correlation with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is rarely reported. In this study, the authors’ aim was to assess the impact of spondylolisthesis reduction on 24-month PRO measures after decompression and fusion surgery for Meyerding grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 24-month follow-up, and quantitative correlation between Meyerding slippage reduction and PROs was performed. Baseline and 24-month PROs, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)–back pain (NRS-BP), NRS-leg pain (NRS-LP), and satisfaction (North American Spine Society patient satisfaction questionnaire) scores were noted. Multivariable regression models were fitted for 24-month PROs and complications after adjusting for an array of preoperative and surgical variables. Data were analyzed for magnitude of slippage reduction and correlated with PROs. Patients were divided into two groups: < 3 mm reduction and ≥ 3 mm reduction. RESULTS Of 608 patients from 12 participating sites, 206 patients with complete data were identified in the QOD and included in this study. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the cohorts except for depression, listhesis magnitude, and the proportion with dynamic listhesis (which were accounted for in the multivariable analysis). One hundred four (50.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm (mean 5.19, range 3 to 11), and 102 (49.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction < 3 mm (mean 0.41, range 2 to −2). Patients in both groups (slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm, and slippage reduction < 3 mm) reported significant improvement in all primary patient reported outcomes (all p < 0.001). There was no significant difference with regard to the PROs between patients with or without intraoperative reduction of listhesis on univariate and multivariable analyses (ODI, EQ-5D, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, or satisfaction). There was no significant difference in complications between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS Significant improvement was found in terms of all PROs in patients undergoing decompression and fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. There was no correlation with clinical outcomes and magnitude of Meyerding slippage reduction.

Abstract BACKGROUND Trials of lumbar spondylolisthesis are difficult to compare because of the heterogeneity in the populations studied. OBJECTIVE To define patterns of clinical presentation. METHODS This is a study of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database spondylolisthesis registry, including patients who underwent single-segment surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Twenty-four-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected. A k-means clustering analysis—an unsupervised machine learning algorithm—was used to identify clinical presentation phenotypes. RESULTS Overall, 608 patients were identified, of which 507 (83.4%) had 24-mo follow-up. Clustering revealed 2 distinct cohorts. Cluster 1 (high disease burden) was younger, had higher body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) grades, and globally worse baseline PROs. Cluster 2 (intermediate disease burden) was older and had lower BMI and ASA grades, and intermediate baseline PROs. Baseline radiographic parameters were similar ( P > .05). Both clusters improved clinically ( P < .001 all 24-mo PROs). In multivariable adjusted analyses, mean 24-mo Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale Back Pain (NRS-BP), Numeric Rating Scale Leg Pain, and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) were markedly worse for the high-disease-burden cluster (adjusted- P < .001). However, the high-disease-burden cluster demonstrated greater 24-mo improvements for ODI, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D (adjusted- P < .05) and a higher proportion reaching ODI minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (adjusted- P = .001). High-disease-burden cluster had lower satisfaction (adjusted- P = .02). CONCLUSION We define 2 distinct phenotypes—those with high vs intermediate disease burden—operated for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Those with high disease burden were less satisfied, had a lower quality of life, and more disability, more back pain, and more leg pain than those with intermediate disease burden, but had greater magnitudes of improvement in disability, back pain, quality of life, and more often reached ODI MCID.

OBJECTIVE The impact of the type of pain presentation on outcomes of spine surgery remains elusive. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of predominant symptom location (predominant arm pain vs predominant neck pain vs equal neck and arm pain) on postoperative improvement in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database cervical spine module was queried for patients undergoing 1- or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative spine disease. RESULTS A total of 9277 patients were included in the final analysis. Of these patients, 18.4% presented with predominant arm pain, 32.3% presented with predominant neck pain, and 49.3% presented with equal neck and arm pain. Patients with predominant neck pain were found to have higher (worse) 12-month Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (coefficient 0.24, 95% CI 0.15–0.33; p < 0.0001). The three groups did not differ significantly in odds of return to work and achieving minimal clinically important difference in NDI score at the 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Analysis from a national spine registry showed significantly lower odds of patient satisfaction and worse NDI score at 1 year after surgery for patients with predominant neck pain when compared with patients with predominant arm pain and those with equal neck and arm pain after 1- or 2-level ACDF. With regard to return to work, all three groups (arm pain, neck pain, and equal arm and neck pain) were found to be similar after multivariable analysis. The authors’ results suggest that predominant pain location, especially predominant neck pain, might be a significant determinant of improvement in functional outcomes and patient satisfaction after ACDF for degenerative spine disease. In addition to confirmation of the common experience that patients with predominant neck pain have worse outcomes, the authors’ findings provide potential targets for improvement in patient management for these specific populations.