Search

Objective Ventricular opening during glioblastoma (GBM) resection is controversial. Sufficient evidence regarding its prognostic role is missing. We investigated the impact of ventricular opening on overall survival (OS), hydrocephalus development, and postoperative morbidity in patients with GBM. Methods Patients who underwent primary GBM resection between 2006 and 2013 were assessed retrospectively. Established predictors for overall survival (age, Karnofsky Performance Status, extent of resection, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation status, isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation status) and further clinical data (postoperative status, further treatment, preoperative tumor volume, proximity to the ventricle) were included in univariate and multivariate analyses. Results Thirteen (5.7%) of 229 patients developed a hydrocephalus. Multivariate logistic regression showed that neither ventricular opening, tumor size, proximity to the ventricle, nor extent of resection were significant risk factors for hydrocephalus. Ventricular opening did not delay postoperative therapy and was not associated with neurological morbidity. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients who underwent ventricular opening ( n = 114) exhibited a median OS of 14.3 months (12.9–16.5), whereas patients who did not undergo ventricular opening ( n = 115) exhibited a median OS of 18.6 months (16.1–20.8). However, multivariate Cox regression ( n = 134) did not confirm ventricular opening as an independent negative predictor of OS (risk ratio 1.09, P = 0.77). Instead, it showed that a greater preoperative tumor volume >22.8 cm 3 was a negative predictor of OS (risk ratio 1.76, P = 0.02). Conclusions Because extent of resection is a strong independent predictor of OS and ventricular opening is safe, neurosurgeons should consider ventricular opening to achieve maximal tumor resection.

Purpose To assess the efficacy of individual sentinel node (SN)-guided pelvic intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) by determining nodal clearance rate [(n expected nodal involvement − n observed regional recurrences)/n expected nodal involvement] in comparison with surgically staged patients. Methods and Materials Data on 475 high-risk prostate cancer patients were examined. Sixty-one consecutive patients received pelvic SN-based IMRT (5 × 1.8 Gy/wk to 50.4 Gy [pelvic nodes + individual SN] and an integrated boost with 5 × 2.0 Gy/wk to 70.0 Gy to prostate + [base of] seminal vesicles) and neo-/adjuvant long-term androgen deprivation therapy; 414 patients after SN–pelvic lymph node dissection were used to calculate the expected nodal involvement rate for the radiation therapy sample. Biochemical control and overall survival were estimated for the SN-IMRT patients using the Kaplan-Meier method. The expected frequency of nodal involvement in the radiation therapy group was estimated by imputing frequencies of node-positive patients in the surgical sample to the pattern of Gleason, prostate-specific antigen, and T category in the radiation therapy sample. Results After a median follow-up of 61 months, 5-year OS after SN-guided IMRT reached 84.4%. Biochemical control according to the Phoenix definition was 73.8%. The nodal clearance rate of SN-IMRT reached 94%. Retrospective follow-up evaluation is the main limitation. Conclusions Radiation treatment of pelvic nodes individualized by inclusion of SNs is an effective regional treatment modality in high-risk prostate cancer patients. The pattern of relapse indicates that the SN-based target volume concept correctly covers individual pelvic nodes. Thus, this SN-based approach justifies further evaluation, including current dose-escalation strategies to the prostate in a larger prospective series.