Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) Induced Higher-Grade Transformation of a Benign Meningioma into Atypical Meningioma.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a widely used treatment modality for the management of meningioma. Whether used as a primary, adjuvant, or salvage procedure, SRS is a safe, less invasive, and effective modality of treatment as microsurgery. The transformation of a meningioma following radiosurgery raises a concern, and our current understanding about it is extremely limited. Only a few case reports have described meningioma dedifferentiation after SRS to a higher grade. Moreover, a relatively small number of cases have been reported in large retrospective studies with little elaboration. Case Description. We report a detailed case description of a 41-year-old man with progressive meningioma enlargement and rapid grade progression after SRS, which was histopathologically confirmed before and after SRS. We discussed the clinical presentation, radiological/histopathological features, and outcome. We also reviewed previous studies that reported the outcome and follow-up of patients diagnosed with grade I meningioma histopathologically or presumed with benign meningioma by radiological features who underwent primary or adjuvant radiosurgery. CONCLUSION: The risk of progression after SRS is low, and the risk of higher-grade transformation after SRS is trivial. The early timing for recurrence and field-related radiation may favor a relationship between SRS and higher-grade transformation (causality) although transformation as a part of the natural history of the disease cannot be fully excluded. Tumor progression (treatment failure) after SRS may demonstrate a transformation, and careful, close, and long follow-up is highly recommended. Also, acknowledging that there is a low risk of early and delayed complications and a trivial risk of transformation should not preclude its use as SRS affords a high level of safety and efficiency.

Neurosurgical Procedures and Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case-Control Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative documentation of the effects of outbreaks, including the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is limited in neurosurgery. Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical practice and to determine whether surgical procedures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A multicenter case-control study was conducted, involving patients who underwent neurosurgical intervention in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during 2 periods: pre-COVID-19 and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The surgical intervention data evaluated included diagnostic category, case priority, complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 850 procedures were included, 36% during COVID-19. The median number of procedures per day was significantly lower during the COVID-19 period (5.5 cases) than during the pre-COVID-19 period (12 cases; P < 0.0001). Complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality did not differ during the pandemic. In a multivariate analysis comparing both periods, case priority levels 1 (immediate) (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-2.67), 1 (1-24 h) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.41), and 4 (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.42) showed significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall number of neurosurgical procedures declined, but the load of emergency procedures remained the same, thus highlighting the need to allocate sufficient resources for emergencies. More importantly, performing neurosurgical procedures during the pandemic in regions with limited effects of the outbreak on the health care system was safe. Our findings may aid in developing guidelines for acute and long-term care during pandemics in surgical subspecialties.

The longitudinal impact of COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical practice.

OBJECTIVE: This observational cross-sectional multicenter study aimed to evaluate the longitudinal impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on neurosurgical practice. METHODS: We included 29 participating neurosurgeons in centers from all geographical regions in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study period, which was between March 5, 2020 and May 20, 2020, was divided into three equal periods to determine the longitudinal effect of COVID-19 measures on neurosurgical practice over time. RESULTS: During the 11-week study period, 474 neurosurgical interventions were performed. The median number of neurosurgical procedures per day was 5.5 (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.5-8). The number of cases declined from 72 in the first week and plateaued at the 30's range in subsequent weeks. The most and least number of performed procedures were oncology (129 [27.2 %]) and functional procedures (6 [1.3 %]), respectively. Emergency (Priority 1) cases were more frequent than non-urgent (Priority 4) cases (178 [37.6 %] vs. 74 [15.6 %], respectively). In our series, there were three positive COVID-19 cases. There was a significant among-period difference in the length of hospital stay, which dropped from a median stay of 7 days (IQR: 4-18) to 6 (IQR: 3-13) to 5 days (IQR: 2-8). There was no significant among-period difference with respect to institution type, complications, or mortality. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic decreased the number of procedures performed in neurosurgery practice. The load of emergency neurosurgery procedures did not change throughout the three periods, which reflects the need to designate ample resources to cover emergencies. Notably, with strict screening for COVID -19 infections, neurosurgical procedures could be safely performed during the early pandemic phase. We recommend to restart performing neurosurgical procedures once the pandemic gets stabilized to avoid possible post pandemic health-care system intolerable overload.

Lumboperitoneal shunt insertion without fluoroscopy guidance: Accuracy of placement in a series of 107 procedures.

Background: Lumboperitoneal (LP) shunts were the mainstay of cerebrospinal fluid diversion therapy for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). The traditionally cited advantage of LP shunts over ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts is the ease of insertion in IIH. This needs to be placed at the level of L3/4 to be below the level of the spinal cord. The objective of this study was to analyse the position of LP shunts inserted without portable fluoroscopy guidance.  Methods: A retrospective analysis of radiology was performed for patients who underwent lumboperitoneal shunts between 2006 and 2016 at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery. Patients who had insertion of a LP shunt without fluoroscopy guidance were selected.  Patients without post-procedural imaging were excluded. A retrospective analysis of the clinical notes was also performed.  Results: Between 2006 and 2016, 163 lumboperitoneal shunts were inserted in 105 patients. A total of 56 cases were excluded due to lack of post-procedural imaging; therefore, 107 post-procedural x-rays were reviewed. In 17 (15.8%) cases the proximal end of the LP shunt was placed at L1/L2 level or above.  Conclusions: Insertion of LP shunts without portable fluoroscopy guidance gives a 15.8% risk of incorrect positioning of the proximal end of the catheter. We suggest that x-ray is recommended to avoid incorrect level placement. Further investigation could be carried out with a control group with fluoroscopy against patients without.