3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The 6 thalamic regions: surgical approaches to thalamic cavernous malformations, operative results, and clinical outcomes

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          OBJECT

          The ideal surgical approach to thalamic cavernous malformations (CMs) varies according to their location within the thalamus. To standardize surgical approaches, the authors have divided the thalamus into 6 different regions and matched them with the corresponding surgical approach.

          METHODS

          The regions were defined as Region 1 (anteroinferior), Region 2 (medial), Region 3 (lateral), Region 4 (posterosuperior), Region 5 (lateral posteroinferior), and Region 6 (medial posteroinferior). The senior author’s surgical experience with 46 thalamic CMs was reviewed according to this classification. An orbitozygomatic approach was used for Region 1; anterior ipsilateral transcallosal for Region 2; anterior contralateral transcallosal for Region 3; posterior transcallosal for Region 4; parietooccipital transventricularfor Region 5; and supracerebellar-infratentorial for Region 6.

          RESULTS

          Region 3 was the most common location (17 [37%]). There were 5 CMs in Region 1 (11%), 9 in Region 2 (20%), 17 in Region 3 (37%), 3 in Region 4 (6%), 4 in Region 5 (9%), and 8 in Region 6 (17%). Complete resection was achieved in all patients except for 2, who required a second-stage operation. The mean follow-up period was 1.7 years (range 6 months-9 years). At the last clinical follow-up, 40 patients (87%) had an excellent or good outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 0–2) and 6 (13%) had poor outcome (mRS scores 3–4). Relative to their preoperative condition, 42 patients (91%) were unchanged or improved, and 4 (9%) were worse.

          CONCLUSIONS

          The authors have presented the largest series reported to date of surgically treated thalamic CMs, achieving excellent results using this methodology. In the authors’ experience, conceptually dividing the thalamus into 6 different regions aids in the selection of the ideal surgical approach fora specific region.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Advances in the treatment and outcome of brainstem cavernous malformation surgery: a single-center case series of 300 surgically treated patients.

          Brainstem cavernous malformations (BSCMs) are relatively uncommon, low-flow vascular lesions. Because of their relative rarity, relatively little data on their natural history and on the efficacy and durability of their treatment.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Update on the natural history of cavernous malformations and factors predicting aggressive clinical presentation.

            Cavernous malformations (CMs) are angiographically occult, low-pressure neurovascular lesions with distinct imaging and clinical characteristics. They present with seizure, neurological compromise due to lesion hemorrhage or expansion, or as incidental findings on neuroimaging studies. Treatment options include conservative therapy, medical management of seizures, surgical intervention for lesion resection, and in select cases stereotactic radiosurgery. Optimal management requires a thorough understanding of the natural history of CMs including consideration of issues such as mode of presentation, lesion location, and genetics that may impact the associated neurological risk. Over the past 2 decades, multiple studies have been published, shedding valuable light on the clinical characteristics and natural history of these malformations. The purpose of this review is to provide the reader with a concise consolidation of this published material such that they may better understand the risks associated with CMs and their implications on patient treatment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgical approaches to brainstem cavernous malformations.

              Brainstem cavernous malformations (CMs) are low-flow vascular lesions in eloquent locations. Their presentation is often marked with symptomatic hemorrhages that appear to occur more frequently than hemorrhage from supratentorial cavernomas. Brainstem CMs can be removed using 1 of the 5 standard skull-base approaches: retrosigmoid, suboccipital (with or without telovelar approach), supracerebellar infratentorial, orbitozygomatic, and far lateral. Patients being referred to a tertiary institution often have lesions that are aggressive with respect to bleeding rates. Nonetheless, the indications for surgery, in the authors' opinion, are the same for all lesions: those that are symptomatic, those that cause mass effect, or those that abut a pial surface. Patients often have relapsing and remitting courses of symptoms, with each hemorrhage causing a progressive and stepwise decline. Many patients experience new postoperative deficits, most of which are transient and resolve fully. Despite the risks associated with operating in this highly eloquent tissue, most patients have had favorable outcomes in the authors' experience. Surgical treatment of brainstem CMs protects patients from the potentially devastating effects of rehemorrhage, and the authors believe that the benefits of intervention outweigh the risks in patients with the appropriate indications.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Neurosurgery
                Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG)
                0022-3085
                1933-0693
                September 2015
                September 2015
                : 676-685
                Article
                10.3171/2014.11.JNS14381
                26024002
                145931f4-f9eb-40d0-96d8-35be9fed50f1
                © 2015
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article