Repeat stereotactic radiosurgery for the management of locally recurrent brain metastases.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a well-established treatment option for brain metastases (BM). Repeat SRS for progressive BM is an increasingly used paradigm, although little data is available to support this practice. The goal of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a second SRS procedure on a previously treated BM. METHODS: We performed a retrospective metastasis-level analysis of patients who underwent two SRS procedures on the same lesion and for whom at least 6 months of radiological follow-up was available. The data collected included patient characteristics, clinical symptoms at time of treatment, SRS parameters, radiological response per RANO-BM criteria, clinical evolution and survival. RESULTS: Seventy-five BM in 56 patients were included in the analysis. Most frequent primary histologies were non-small-cell lung cancer (59%) and breast cancer (19%). At the second SRS, median treatment volume was 1.19 cc (range 0.07-20.6) treated with a median margin dose of 18 Gy (range 12-20) at the 50% isodose line (range 30-80%). Median follow-up was 11 months. Progression per RANO-BM criteria occurred in 31%, yielding actuarial local control at 1, 2, and 5 years of 68%, 54% and 54% respectively. At last follow-up, 10 patients (18%) had improved relative to the initial presentation, while 21 (38%) were stable and 25 (44%) were deteriorated. Radiation-induced edema and radionecrosis occurred in 8.3% and 5% respectively. The median survival from the diagnosis of BM was 30 months. CONCLUSION: Repeat SRS is a safe and effective novel therapeutic approach to consider in carefully selected patients.

Response Assessment in Brain Metastases Managed by Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Reappraisal of the RANO-BM Criteria.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) are increasingly being treated using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Standardized response criteria are necessary to improve research and treatment protocols. This study's goal was to validate the RANO-BM criteria thresholds for tumor progression in a cohort of patients with brain metastases managed using SRS. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated at least twice with SRS for brain metastases. Local progression, as defined by RANO-BM criteria, was compared to our multidisciplinary tumor board's treatment recommendation. A ROC curve was generated using varying diameter thresholds to assess the sensitivity and specificity of current RANO-BM criteria. RESULTS: 249 metastases in 67 patients were included in the analysis. RANO-BM criteria current progression thresholds yielded a sensitivity of 38%, a specificity of 95%, a positive predictive value of 71%, and a negative predictive value of 84% relative to our tumor board's treatment recommendation. Modified RANO-BM criteria using absolute diameter differences of 2.5 mm yielded a sensitivity of 83%, a specificity of 87%, a positive predictive value of 67% and a negative predictive value of 94%. CONCLUSIONS: Current RANO-BM criteria unreliably identifies clinically relevant tumor progression. The use of absolute diameter differences thresholds appears superior in our BM cohort.

Use of Antibacterial Envelopes for Prevention of Infection in Neuromodulation Implantable Pulse Generators.

BACKGROUND: Neuromodulation unit placement carries a historic infection rate as high as 12%. Treatment of such requires surgical removal and a long course of systemic antibiotics. Antibiotic-impregnated envelopes have been effective in preventing infection in implantable cardiac devices. At our center, 1 surgeon uses these envelopes with all implanted neuromodulation units. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of antibacterial envelopes in prevention of infection in neuromodulation device placement. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive implantable pulse generator (IPG) unit implantation with an antibacterial envelope at a single center between October 2014 and December 2019. We collected demographic data, including postoperative infections, reoperations, and complications, associated with the IPGs. This cohort was then compared with a historical cohort of consecutive patients undergoing surgery before envelope usage (October 2007-April 2014). RESULTS: In the pre-envelope cohort of 151 IPGs placed in 116 patients, there were 18 culture-confirmed infections (11.9%). In the antibacterial envelope cohort of 233 IPGs placed in 185 patients, there were 5 culture-confirmed infections (2.1%). The absolute risk reduction of the antibacterial envelope was 9.85% (95% CI 4.3%-15.4%, P < .01). The number needed to treat was 10.1 (95% CI 6.5-23.1, P < .01) envelopes to prevent 1 IPG infection. CONCLUSION: We saw a reduced rate of infections in the antibacterial envelope cohort. Although this is likely multifactorial, our results suggest a benefit of antibacterial envelopes on infection after neuromodulation surgery.