Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Yield and utility of routine postoperative imaging after resection of brain metastases

  • Clinical Study
  • Published:
Journal of Neuro-Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computerized tomography (CT) is routinely performed after resection of brain metastases (BrM), regardless of whether there are specific clinical concerns about residual tumor or potential complications. Routine imaging studies contribute a significant amount to the cost of medical care, and their yield and utility are unknown. An IRB-approved retrospective chart review study was performed to analyze all craniotomies for BrM performed at our institution from 2005 to 2012. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify the yield of postoperative imaging. 218 consecutive patients underwent 226 craniotomies for BrM. In 21 cases, new or worsened neurologic deficits occurred after surgery (9.0 %), and 19 of the 21 underwent postoperative imaging. 9 of the 19 patients (47 %) had significant findings on postoperative imaging, and 2 patients required reoperation. 201 patients had no new neurologic deficits (91 %), and 23 of these patients had no postoperative imaging. Of the 178 remaining patients, 160 underwent postoperative MRI and 18 underwent postoperative CT. 9 patients (5.1 %) had unexpected adverse imaging findings; 6 had small stroke, 1 had a subdural hemorrhage and 2 had possible or definite venous sinus occlusion. None of the imaging findings led to changes in management. 182 patients underwent imaging appropriate to detect residual tumor (177 gadolinium enhanced MRI and 5 contrast enhanced CT). Of these patients, 16 were known to have small residual tumors based on intraoperative findings. Of the remaining 166 patients felt to have had gross total tumor resection, 9 (5.4 %) were found to have a small amount of residual tumor on postoperative imaging; no patient had a change in treatment plan as a result. Routine postoperative imaging in patients undergoing craniotomy for BrM has a very low yield and may not be appropriate in the absence of new neurologic deficits, or specific clinical concerns about large amounts of residual tumor or intraoperative complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nayak L, Lee EQ, Wen PY (2012) Epidemiology of brain metastases. Curr Oncol Rep 14:48–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Patchell RA, Tibbs PA, Walsh JW, Dempsey RJ, Maruyama Y, Kryscio RJ et al (1990) A randomized trial of surgery in the treatment of single metastases to the brain. N Engl J Med 322:494–500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paek SH, Audu PB, Sperling MR, Cho J, Andrews DW (2005) Reevaluation of surgery for the treatment of brain metastases: review of 208 patients with single or multiple brain metastases treated at one institution with modern neurosurgical techniques. Neurosurgery 56:1021–1034

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sawaya R, Hammoud M, Schoppa D, Hess KR, Wu SZ, Shi WM et al (1998) Neurosurgical outcomes in a modern series of 400 craniotomies for treatment of parenchymal tumors. Neurosurgery 42:1044–1055

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tan TC, McL Black P (2003) Image-guided craniotomy for cerebral metastases: techniques and outcomes. Neurosurgery 53:82–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gempt J, Gerhardt J, Toth V, Hüttinger S, Ryang YM, Wostrack M et al (2013) Postoperative ischemic changes following brain metastasis resection as measured by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosurg 119:1395–1400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Garrett MC, Bilgin-Freiert A, Bartels C, Everson R, Afsarmanesh N, Pouratian N (2013) An evidence-based approach to the efficient use of computed tomography imaging in the neurosurgical patient neurosurgery 73:209–216

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gans JH, Raper DM, Shah AH, Bregy A, Heros D, Lally BE et al (2013) The role of radiosurgery to the tumor bed after resection of brain metastases. Neurosurgery 72:317–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hartford AC, Paravati AJ, Spire WJ, Li Z, Jarvis LA, Fadul CE, Rhodes CH et al (2013) Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery without whole-brain radiation therapy for brain metastases: potential role of preoperative tumor size. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85:650–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Atalar B, Choi CY, Harsh GR 4th, Chang SD, Gibbs IC, Adler JR, Soltys SG (2013) Cavity volume dynamics after resection of brain metastases and timing of postresection cavity stereotactic radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 72:180–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Standards

We the authors declare that the experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald J. Benveniste.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benveniste, R.J., Ferraro, N. & Tsimpas, A. Yield and utility of routine postoperative imaging after resection of brain metastases. J Neurooncol 118, 363–367 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-014-1440-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-014-1440-3

Keywords

Navigation