ObjectiveRepeated controlled studies have revealed that stereotactic radiosurgery is better than microsurgery for patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS) <3 cm in need of intervention. In this systematic review we aimed to compare results from single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) for patients with VS.Data sources and eligibility criteriaWe systematically searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane and screened relevant articles for references. Publications from 1995 through 2014 with a minimum of 50 adult (>18 years) patients with unilateral VS, followed for a median of >5 years, were eligible for inclusion. After screening titles and abstracts of the 1094 identified articles and systematically reviewing 98 of these articles, 19 were included.InterventionPatients with unilateral VS treated with radiosurgery were compared to patients treated with fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy.ResultsNo randomized controlled trial (RCT) was identified. None of the identified controlled studies comparing SRS with FSRT were eligible according to the inclusion criteria. Nineteen case series on SRS (n = 17) and FSRT (n = 2) were included in the systematic review. Loss of tumor control necessitating a new VS-targeted intervention was found in an average of 5.0% of the patients treated with SRS and in 4.8% treated with FSRT. Mean deterioration ratio for patients with serviceable hearing before treatment was 49% for SRS and 45% for FSRT, respectively. The risk for facial nerve deterioration was 3.6% for SRS and 11.2% for FSRT and for trigeminal nerve deterioration 6.0% for SRS and 8.4% for FSRT. Since these results were obtained from case series, a regular meta-analysis was not attempted.ConclusionSRS and FSRT are both noninvasive treatment alternatives for patients with VS with low rates of treatment failure in need of rescue therapy. In this selection of patients, the progression-free survival rates were on the order of 92–100% for both treatment options. There is a lack of high-quality studies comparing radiation therapy alternatives for patients with VS. Finally, 19 articles reported long-term tumor control after SRS, while only 2 articles reported long-term FSRT results, making effect estimates more uncertain for FSRT.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00701-017-3164-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Spinal meningiomas are the most common adult primary spinal tumor, constituting 24–45% of spinal intradural tumors and 2% of all meningiomas. The aim of this study was to assess postoperative complications, long-term outcomes, predictors of functional improvement and differences between elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly (18–69 years) patients surgically treated for spinal meningiomas. Variables were retrospectively collected from patient charts and magnetic resonance images. Baseline comparisons, paired testing and regression analyses were used. In conclusion, 129 patients were included, with a median follow-up time of 8.2 years. Motor deficit was the most common presenting symptom (66%). The median time between diagnosis and surgery was 1.3 months. A postoperative complication occurred in 10 (7.8%) and tumor growth or recurrence in 6 (4.7%) patients. Surgery was associated with significant improvement of motor and sensory deficit, gait disturbance, bladder dysfunction and pain. Time to surgery, tumor area and the degree of spinal cord compression significantly predicted postoperative improvement in a modified McCormick scale (mMCs) in the univariable regression analysis, and spinal cord compression showed independent risk association in multivariable analysis. There was no difference in improvement, complications or tumor control between elderly and non-elderly patients. We concluded that surgery of spinal meningiomas was associated with significant long-term neurological improvement, which could be predicted by time to surgery, tumor size and spinal cord compression.

OBJECTIVE Surgery for chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is one of the most common neurosurgical procedures. The benefit of postoperative passive subdural drainage compared with no drains has been established, but other drainage techniques are common, and their effectiveness compared with passive subdural drains remains unknown. METHODS In Scandinavian population-based cohorts the authors conducted a consecutive, parallel cohort study to compare different drainage techniques. The techniques used were continuous irrigation and drainage (CID cohort, n = 166), passive subdural drainage (PD cohort, n = 330), and active subgaleal drainage (AD cohort, n = 764). The primary end point was recurrence in need of reoperation within 6 months of index surgery. Secondary end points were complications, perioperative mortality, and overall survival. The analyses were based on direct regional comparison (i.e., surgical strategy). RESULTS Recurrence in need of surgery was observed in 18 patients (10.8%) in the CID cohort, in 66 patients (20.0%) in the PD cohort, and in 85 patients (11.1%) in the AD cohort (p < 0.001). Complications were more common in the CID cohort (14.5%) compared with the PD (7.3%) and AD (8.1%) cohorts (p = 0.019). Perioperative mortality rates were similar between cohorts (p = 0.621). There were some differences in baseline and treatment characteristics possibly interfering with the above-mentioned results. However, after adjusting for differences in baseline and treatment characteristics in a regression model, the drainage techniques were still significantly associated with clinical outcome (p < 0.001 for recurrence, p = 0.017 for complications). CONCLUSIONS Compared with the AD cohort, more recurrences were observed in the PD cohort and more complications in the CID cohort, also after adjustment for differences at baseline. Although the authors cannot exclude unmeasured confounding factors when comparing centers, AD appears superior to the more common PD. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01930617 (clinicaltrials.gov).