Citations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The therapeutic approach for small- and medium-sized vestibular schwannoma (VS) with normal hearing function remains controversial, with limited comparative data regarding hearing outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or observation (OBS). We evaluated the serviceable hearing preservation, loss of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery class A hearing, and tumor control (TC) across individuals with Koos grade I and II VSs and normal hearing at presentation who underwent SRS or OBS. METHODS: In this multicenter international study, we retrospectively analyzed the hearing, radiological, and neurological outcomes of patients who underwent SRS (SRS group) or OBS (OBS group). The cohorts were matched using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, pure-tone average, and speech discrimination score at a 1:1 ratio without replacement. RESULTS: After matching, each group comprised 57 patients. The median follow-up was 49 and 37 months for the SRS and the OBS groups, respectively ( P = .3). The 5- and 9-year serviceable hearing preservation rates in the SRS group were 76.2% and 42.4% vs 56.1% and 16.8% in the OBS group ( P = .17). Class A preservation occurred in 57.9% (33/57) of the SRS and 52.6% (30/57) of the OBS cohorts ( P = .70). Regarding the TC rates, SRS was associated with significantly higher TC rates ( P < .0001). CONCLUSION: We found that SRS is significantly superior regarding TC and provided noninferior hearing outcomes compared with OBS in VS patients with American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery class A hearing at presentation. Therefore, we suggest performing SRS in individuals with VS and normal hearing function.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Surgery in NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2-SWN) vestibular schwannoma (VS) carries a higher risk of facial nerve damage, hearing loss, and partial resection, than in sporadic cases. Radiosurgery is also associated with higher failure compared with sporadic schwannomas. Nowadays, bevacizumab (BEV) is frequently considered in the NF2-SWN population. However, some patients experience progression despite treatment. Among other surgical risks, in BEV-treated patients, hemorrhage and impaired healing are specific considerations. These concerns have led manufacturers to recommend stopping BEV 6 to 8 weeks preoperatively. The aim of our multicentric study was to assess the perioperative bleeding risk and postoperative outcomes in NF2-SWN patients undergoing VS surgery after preoperative BEV treatment. METHODS: Our retrospective analysis included medical and surgical records along with imaging reviews from 4 high-volume tertiary academic referral centers for NF2-SWN and VS. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients met the inclusion criteria. VS had a mean volume of 13.2 ±7.6 cm 3 corresponding to 1 KOOS III and 20 KOOS IV. BEV was stopped at a mean of 5.8 ± 4.0 months before surgery with a total mean treatment duration of 33.7 ± 20.7 months and a monthly dose of 10.2 ± 4.1 mg/kg. Intraoperatively, the tumor was assessed to be bloody by the operating surgeons in 7 patients. Late BEV discontinuation and high cumulative dose independently predicted perioperative bleeding and longer surgery duration. No other complication such as wound dehiscence was reported. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that a higher cumulative BEV dose (∼600 mg/kg) and a longer interval between BEV discontinuation and surgery (∼8 months) are associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in intraoperative bleeding risk. Based on these observations, a BEV-free window between 6 weeks and 6 months (depending on the clinical scenario) before tumor resection seems optimal, particularly for patients with high cumulative exposure.

Background: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is life-threatening for immunocompromised patients. No consensus exists on PJP prophylaxis for immunosuppressed patients without HIV, transplant, or cancer. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of adult immunosuppressed patients with PJP diagnosed between 1990 and 2020 at Mayo Clinic. Patients with HIV, solid organ transplants, or cancer were excluded. Demographic data, treatments, and outcomes were manually abstracted. Results: The most common indications for immunosuppression were rheumatoid arthritis (19.7%), vasculitis (18.1%), and interstitial lung disease (ILD) not related to connective tissue disease (17.6%). Despite having high risk of PJP, 86.0% of patients did not receive PJP prophylaxis. Corticosteroids were the most common immunosuppressive agent used (84.5%), with 64.4% of patients receiving high-dose treatment. Nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were used for 49.7%, including methotrexate (51.0%), azathioprine (22.9%), and hydroxychloroquine (11.5%). Biologics were prescribed for 25.4%, primarily rituximab (59.2%) and infliximab (22.4%). Hospitalization occurred for 76.7% of patients; 70.3% required intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and 46.6% received mechanical ventilation. The in-hospital mortality rate was 30.4% overall and 53.6% for patients on ventilation. Predictors of death included ILD [odds ratio (OR), 4.61; 95% CI, 1.75-13.00], ICU admission (OR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.19-11.08), and ventilator use (OR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.30-9.79). Biologic use was associated with lower odds of death (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.11-0.89). Conclusions: Most patients in our cohort did not receive PJP prophylaxis, and outcomes were poor with high mortality rates. Standardized risk stratification and prophylaxis protocols are needed to improve outcomes.