No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Although many patients with a tumour in the left hemisphere deteriorated in their language function directly after surgery, their prognosis for recovery was good.

No abstract

In patients with low-grade glioma (LGG), language deficits are usually only found and investigated after surgery. Deficits may be present before surgery but to date, studies have yielded varying results regarding the extent of this problem and in what language domains deficits may occur. This study therefore aims to explore the language ability of patients who have recently received a presumptive diagnosis of low-grade glioma, and also to see whether they reported any changes in their language ability before receiving treatment. Twenty-three patients were tested using a comprehensive test battery that consisted of standard aphasia tests and tests of lexical retrieval and high-level language functions. The patients were also asked whether they had noticed any change in their use of language or ability to communicate. The test scores were compared to a matched reference group and to clinical norms. The presumed LGG group performed significantly worse than the reference group on two tests of lexical retrieval. Since five patients after surgery were discovered to have a high-grade glioma, a separate analysis excluding them were performed. These analyses revealed comparable results; however one test of word fluency was no longer significant. Individually, the majority exhibited normal or nearly normal language ability and only a few reported subjective changes in language or ability to communicate. This study shows that patients who have been diagnosed with LGG generally show mild or no language deficits on either objective or subjective assessment.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11060-017-2699-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundLow‐grade glioma (LGG) is a type of brain tumour often situated in or near areas involved in language, sensory or motor functions. Depending on localization and tumour characteristics, language or cognitive impairments due to tumour growth and/or surgical resection are obvious risks. One task that may be at risk is writing, both because it requires intact language and memory function and because it is a very complex and cognitively demanding task. The most commonly reported language deficit in LGG patients is oral lexical‐retrieval difficulties, and poor lexical retrieval would be expected to affect writing fluency.AimsTo explore whether writing fluency is affected in LGG patients before and after surgery and whether it is related to performance on tasks of oral lexical retrieval.Methods & ProceduresTwenty consecutive patients with presumed LGG wrote a narrative and performed a copy task before undergoing surgery and at 3‐month follow‐up using keystroke‐logging software. The same tasks were performed by a reference group (N = 31). The patients were also tested using the Boston Naming Test (BNT) and word‐fluency tests before and after surgery. Writing fluency was compared between the patients and the reference group, and between the patients before and after surgery. Relationships between performance on tests of oral lexical retrieval and writing fluency were investigated both before and after surgery.Outcome & ResultsDifferent aspects of writing fluency were affected in the LGG patients both before and after surgery. However, when controlling for the effect of typing speed, the LGG group differed significantly from the reference group only in the proportion of pauses within words. After surgery, a significant decline was seen in production rate and typing speed in the narrative task, and a significant increase was seen in pauses before words. Strong positive relationships were found between oral lexical retrieval and writing fluency both before and after surgery.Conclusions & ImplicationsAlthough aspects of writing fluency were affected both before and after surgery, the results indicate that typing speed is an important factor behind the pre‐surgery differences. However, the decline in overall productivity and the increase in pauses before words after surgery could be related to a lexical deficit. This is supported by the finding that oral lexical‐retrieval scores were strongly correlated with writing fluency. However, further exploration is needed to identify the language and cognitive abilities affecting writing processes in LGG patients.

No abstract