Patient-reported outcome and preference after craniotomy and laser interstitial thermal therapy ablation: a pilot study.

Objective: Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows cytoreduction of brain tumors and can be considered as an alternative to craniotomy. The authors surveyed 27 patients who underwent both craniotomy and LITT during distinct stages of their oncology journey to assess patient-reported outcomes comparing both procedures.
Methods: A 9-question survey was developed and validated to assess patient-reported postoperative recovery, pain level, narcotic use, and procedure preference. The survey was administered to patients with WHO grade II-IV gliomas who underwent both craniotomy and LITT.
Results: The survey was reviewed by independent surgeons, patient advocates, and patients for face validity and showed > 90% intrarater agreement over time. The cohort had a mean age of 57 ± 12 years, and 78% had glioblastoma. There was no significant difference in symptomatic improvement postcraniotomy or post-LITT (30% vs 4%, p = 0.17). Similarly, no significance was detected in patient-reported recovery time from craniotomy (time required to return to preoperative state: mean 4.3 ± 9.1 weeks, median 2 weeks) or LITT (mean 2 ± 2.3 weeks, median 1 week; p = 0.21). Notably, postsurgical pain (0-10 on the visual analog scale) and need for narcotic use in the first week (yes/no) after the procedure were significantly lower post-LITT (average visual analog scale score 1.7 vs 5 points, narcotic use 4% vs 81%; p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). When asked which procedure they would choose-having experienced both craniotomy and LITT-surveyed patients overwhelmingly chose LITT over craniotomy (89% vs 11%, p < 0.0001). Of note, the patients who preferred craniotomy experienced improved neurological function postcraniotomy or suffered new deficits post-LITT.
Conclusions: In this pilot study, patients reported less pain and narcotic use post-LITT relative to craniotomy and generally preferred the former procedure if given the choice. Validation of these results in future studies can help inform decision-making in clinical scenarios where there is equipoise between LITT and craniotomy.