Surgical Management of Giant Intracranial Meningioma: Operative Nuances, Challenges, and Outcome

• Published in: World neurosurgery 2018-02, Vol.110, p.e32-e41
• Main Authors: Narayan, Vinayak, Bir, Shyamal C., Mohammed, Nasser, Savardekar, Amey R., Patra, Devi Prasad, Nanda, Anil
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Giant intracranial meningioma; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Meningeal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Meningeal Neoplasms - pathology; Meningeal Neoplasms - surgery; Meningioma - diagnostic imaging; Meningioma - pathology; Meningioma - surgery; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Grading; Neurosurgical Procedures; Recurrence-free survival; Regression Analysis; Retrospective Studies; Surgical outcome; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Burden; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1878-8750; 1878-8769
• DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.09.184

The giant intracranial meningioma (GIM) constitutes a different spectrum of brain tumors that invade the vital neurovascular structures, which makes the primary mode of treatment, surgery, a technically challenging one. The surgery for GIM is unique because of the large size of the tumor, prominent vascularity, entangling and limited visualization of various neurovascular structures, and severe cerebral edema. This study reports the authors surgical experience of 80 GIM cases, the operative challenges and surgical outcome. A retrospective analysis of 80 patients with histologically proven meningioma (≥5 cm) who underwent surgical treatment at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center (Shreveport, Louisiana, USA) over a 20-year period (1995–2015) is presented. The clinical and radiologic data were collected from the hospital database. The tumors were categorized into histologic groups according to World Health Organization (WHO) classification. The relevant statistical analysis of the study was conducted using SPSS software, version 22.0. The study included 27 male patients (33.8%) and 53 female patients (66.3%). The mean age of the cohort was 56 years (56.3±16.1). The mean size of the tumor was 56.4 ±4 mm with a range from 50 mm to 84 mm. Skull base was the most common location of GIM (57 patients, 71.3%). Simpson grade 1 excision was achieved in 9 patients (11.3%), whereas grade 2 excision was achieved in 57 patients (71.3%); 80% of the tumors belonged to WHO grade 1. The operative mortality was seen in 4 patients (5%). Regression analysis showed that age, sex, location of the tumor, neuronavigation, Simpson grade of excision, and histology of tumor were the factors that significantly affected the recurrence-free survival (RFS). The surgery for GIM is unique in different ways. As surgery for GIM is formidable, radiologic characteristics can be useful adjuncts for planning an effective and safe surgical strategy. The factors such as young age, male sex, use of neuronavigation, and skull base location positively influenced RFS, whereas Simpson grade 3 or 4 and poor histologic grade adversely influenced RFS. A careful preoperative evaluation, understanding of the risk factors, effective surgical approach, and judicious use of intraoperative adjuncts are the key factors with pivotal roles in GIM resection.