A single centre’s experience of managing spheno-orbital meningiomas: lessons for recurrent tumour surgery
- 167 Downloads
Spheno-orbital meningiomas are complex tumours involving the sphenoid wing and orbit. Various surgical strategies are available but treatment remains challenging and patients often require more than one surgical procedure. This study evaluated whether smaller surgical approaches and newer reconstructive methods impacted the surgical and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing repeat surgery.
We retrospectively analysed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for a spheno-orbital meningioma at a single tertiary centre between 2005 and 2016. We recorded procedural details and analysed complications, postoperative visual status and patient-reported cosmetic outcome.
Thirty-four procedures were performed in 31 patients (M:F 12:22, median age 49 years) including 19 (56%) primary operations and 15 (44%) repeat procedures. Seven patients (20.5%) had a pterional craniotomy, 19 (56%) had a standard orbitozygomatic craniotomy and 8 (23.5%) underwent a modified mini-orbitozygomatic craniotomy. Calvarial reconstruction was required in 19 cases with a variety of techniques used including titanium mesh (63%), PEEK (26%) and split calvarial bone graft (5%). Total tumour resection (Simpson grade I–II) was significantly higher in patients undergoing primary surgery compared with those having repeat surgery (41% and 0%, respectively; p = 0.0036). Complications occurred in 14 cases (41%). Proptosis improved in all patients and visual acuity improved or remained stable in 93% of patients. Cosmetic outcome measures were obtained for 18 patients (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent): 1–2, 0%; 3, 33%; 4, 28%; 5, 39%. Tumour recurrence requiring further surgery occurred in four patients (12%). There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between patients undergoing primary or repeat surgery.
Spheno-orbital meningiomas are highly complex tumours. Surgical approaches should be tailored to the patient but good clinical and cosmetic outcomes may be achieved with a smaller craniotomy and custom-made implants, irrespective of whether the operation is the patient’s first procedure.
KeywordsMeningioma Spheno-orbital meningioma Orbitozygomatic craniotomy Visual outcome Cosmetic outcome
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Statement of informed consent
This study was approved by the institution’s research committee without the need for informed consent.
- 7.Artico M, Ferrante L, Pastore FS, Ramundo EO, Cantarelli D, Scopelliti D, Iannetti G (2003) Bone autografting of the calvaria and craniofacial skeleton: historical background, surgical results in a series of 15 patients, and review of the literature. Surg Neurol 60(1):71–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Tanriover N, Ulm AJ, Rhoton AL Jr, Kawashima M, Yoshioka N, Lewis SB (2006) One-piece versus two-piece orbitozygomatic craniotomy: quantitative and qualitative considerations. Neurosurgery 58(4 Suppl 2):ONS-229–ONS-237 discussion ONS-237Google Scholar
- 37.Ringel F, Cedzich C, Schramm J (2007) Microsurgical technique and results of a series of 63 spheno-orbital meningiomas. Neurosurgery 60(4 Suppl 2):212–214Google Scholar