RESUMEN
Introduction Radiosurgery is a treatment in which a high dose of ionizing radiation is administered to a small field with high-precision techniques, and is a common treatment for tumors and other diagnoses. A typical complication is the development of radiation-induced edema that can progress to radiation necrosis in some cases. The administration of corticosteroids has been used empirically as a prophylaxis in patients who will be treated by stereotactic radiosurgery with intracranial tumors and other pathologies with the intention to prevent radiation-induced edema and or necrosis. Objective The aim of our study is to describe the actual use of corticosteroids in hospitals that perform stereotactic radiosurgery treatments in Latin America and Spain through a survey applied to neurosurgeons and radiation oncologists and expose the implications of the results, as well as to analyze the available literature on it. Methods We designed a questionnaire of 15 items related to the use of corticosteroids as prophylaxis in patients who will be treated with radiosurgery. The questionnaire was answered by 121 Ibero-Latin Americans through Google Drive considering a database from the Iberolatinoamerican Radiosurgery Association. Results We found that the preference for the use of corticosteroids as prophylaxis for radiosurgery is associated with informal training in radiosurgery, and it was more used by radiation oncologists compared to neurosurgeons (p=0.023). Side effects can exceed the benefit of its use. Conclusions There is practically no literature on the use of corticosteroids as prophylaxis for radiation necrosis in stereotactic radiosurgery. This is a controversial inter- and intra-specialty issue, and its empirical use has a relatively high prevalence, making us reconsider the value of experience in a medical environment that should be fundamentally guided by evidence-based medicine.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are rare vascular congenital lesions that affect mainly patients during their productive years of life. In order to obtain a better quality of life for patients with this disease, a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. Radiosurgery is one of the treatment modalities available for AVMs, but many factors may influence the effectiveness of this strategy. Classically, it has been said that deep-seated lesions have a particular behavior compared with AVMs in other regions, but a differentiation between thalamic lesions and those located in the basal ganglia has not been made. METHODS: Institutional records for central core AVMs treated with radiosurgery between January 2004 and January 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Brainstem lesions were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with deep-seated AVMs were included. Forty-three (87.8%) were located in the thalamus and 6 (12.2%) in the area of basal ganglia. The nidus mean volume was 4.1 cm3 (SD: 4.1), the maximum diameter mean was of 19.5 mm (SD: 8.0). The prescription dose was 18.2 Gy (SD: 2.1), and the follow-up time was 75.8 months (SD: 32.5). There was a greater obliteration rate in thalamic AVMs compared with those located in the basal ganglia: 81.4% versus 33.3% (P = 0.026), respectively. There was no association between categorical variables and obliteration rate. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiosurgery is a good option for patients with thalamic and basal ganglia AVMs, but a multidisciplinary approach to decision-making is mandatory in order to achieve the best results.
