Brackmann, Derald E.

Objective:To address variance in clinical care surrounding sporadic vestibular schwannoma, a modified Delphi study was performed to establish a general framework to approach vestibular schwannoma care. A multidisciplinary panel of experts was established with deliberate representation from key stakeholder societies. External validity of the final statements was assessed through an online survey of registered attendees of the 8th Quadrennial International Conference on Vestibular Schwannoma.Study Design:Modified Delphi method.Methods:The panel consisted of 16 vestibular schwannoma experts (8 neurotology and 8 neurosurgery) and included delegates representing the AAOHNSF, AANS/CNS tumor section, ISRS, and NASBS. The modified Delphi method encompassed a four-step process, comprised of one prevoting round to establish a list of focus areas and three subsequent voting rounds to successively refine individual statements and establish levels of consensus. Thresholds for achieving moderate consensus, at ≥67% agreement, and strong consensus, at ≥80% agreement, were determined a priori. All voting was performed anonymously via the Qualtrics online survey tool and full participation from all panel members was required before procession to the next voting round.Results:Through the Delphi process, 103 items were developed encompassing hearing preservation (N = 49), tumor control and imaging surveillance (N = 20), preferred treatment (N = 24), operative considerations (N = 4), and complications (N = 6). As a result of item refinement, moderate (4%) or strong (96%) consensus was achieved in all 103 final statements. Seventy-nine conference registrants participated in the online survey to assess external validity. Among these survey respondents, moderate (N = 21, 20%) or strong (N = 73, 71%) consensus was achieved in 94 of 103 (91%) statements, and no consensus was reached in 9 (9%). Of the four items with moderate consensus by the expert panel, one had moderate consensus by the conference participants and three had no consensus.Conclusion:This modified Delphi study on sporadic vestibular schwannoma codifies 100% consensus within a multidisciplinary expert panel and is further supported by 91% consensus among an external group of clinicians who regularly provide care for patients with vestibular schwannoma. These final 103 statements address clinically pragmatic items that have direct application to everyday patient care. This document is not intended to define standard of care or drive insurance reimbursement, but rather to provide a general framework to approach vestibular schwannoma care for providers and patients.

Abstract BACKGROUND Facial nerve schwannomas are rare, challenging tumors to manage due to their nerve of origin. Functional outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are incompletely defined. OBJECTIVE To analyze the effect of facial nerve segment involvement on functional outcome for these tumors. METHODS Patients who underwent single-session SRS for facial nerve schwannomas with at least 3 mo follow-up at 11 participating centers were included. Preoperative and treatment variables were recorded. Outcome measures included radiological tumor response and neurological function. RESULTS A total of 63 patients (34 females) were included in the present study. In total, 75% had preoperative facial weakness. Mean tumor volume and margin dose were 2.0 ± 2.4 cm 3 and 12.2 ± 0.54 Gy, respectively. Mean radiological follow-up was 45.5 ± 38.9 mo. Progression-free survival at 2, 5, and 10 yr was 98.1%, 87.2%, and 87.2%, respectively. The cumulative proportion of patients with regressing tumors at 2, 5, and 10 yr was 43.1%, 63.6%, and 63.6%, respectively. The number of involved facial nerve segments significantly predicted tumor progression ( P = .04). Facial nerve function was stable or improved in 57 patients (90%). Patients with involvement of the labyrinthine segment of the facial nerve were significantly more likely to have an improvement in facial nerve function after SRS ( P = .03). Hearing worsened in at least 6% of patients. Otherwise, adverse radiation effects included facial twitching (3 patients), facial numbness (2 patients), and dizziness (2 patients). CONCLUSION SRS for facial nerve schwannomas is effective and spares facial nerve function in most patients. Some patients may have functional improvement after treatment, particularly if the labyrinthine segment is involved.

Surgical management of an latrogenic facial nerve injury represents a significant challenge for the otologic surgeon. The decision to perform facial nerve grafting is a difficult one and is based on the extent of injury to the nerve. We conducted a review of 22 patients who had sustained latrogenic facial nerve injuries during otologic surgery that required surgical exploration. The facial nerve was transected more than half its diameter in 13 of the patients. All of these patients' nerves were repaired either with direct reanastomosis of the facial nerve or with a cable nerve graft. The transection was less than 50% in nine of the patients in the study group. Eight of these patients underwent only decompression of the facial nerve. No patient with a neural repair (direct anastomosis or cable graft) had better than a House grade III result. All of the patients undergoing direct anastomosis of the nerve obtained a House grade III result. The most common result in patients undergoing cable nerve grafting was a House grade IV. The only patients with normal or near‐normal facial nerve function (House grade I or II) had only decompression of the facial nerve. Five of the eight patients undergoing decompression had results similar to those undergoing cable nerve grafts. We conclude that acceptable results can be obtained when the facial nerve is repaired by direct anastomosis or a cable nerve graft. These results are comparable with those of patients treated with decompression only. When in doubt as to the extent of injury, it is preferable to repair the facial nerve, because the extent of injury may be underestimated.