Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation improves the treatment outcome in patients with brain tumors in motor eloquent locations.

BACKGROUND: Neurological and oncological outcomes of motor eloquent brain-tumor patients depend upon the ability to localize functional areas and the respective proposed therapy. We set out to determine whether the use of navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) had an impact on treatment and outcome in patients with brain tumors in motor eloquent locations. METHODS: We enrolled 250 consecutive patients and compared their functional and oncological outcomes to a matched pre-nTMS control group (n = 115). RESULTS: nTMS mapping results disproved suspected involvement of primary motor cortex in 25.1% of cases, expanded surgical indication in 14.8%, and led to planning of more extensive resection in 35.2% of cases and more restrictive resection in 3.5%. In comparison with the control group, the rate of gross total resections increased significantly from 42% to 59% (P < .05). Progression-free-survival for low grade glioma was significantly better in the nTMS group at 22.4 months than in control group at 15.4 months (P < .05). Integration of nTMS led to a nonsignificant change of postoperative deficits from 8.5% in the control group to 6.1% in the nTMS group. CONCLUSIONS: nTMS provides crucial data for preoperative planning and surgical resection of tumors involving essential motor areas. Expanding surgical indications and extent of resection based on nTMS enables more patients to undergo surgery and might lead to better neurological outcomes and higher survival rates in brain tumor patients. The impact of this study should go far beyond the neurosurgical community because it could fundamentally improve treatment and outcome, and its results will likely change clinical practice.

Assessing the functional status of the motor system in brain tumor patients using transcranial magnetic stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is being used in the pre-operative diagnostics of patients with tumors in or near the motor cortex. Although the main purpose of TMS in such patients is to map the functional areas of the motor cortex in spatial relation to the tumor, TMS also provides some numerical neurophysiological measurements of the functional status of the patient's motor system. The aim of this paper is to provide reference values for these neurophysiological measurements from a large and varied clinical sample. METHODS: TMS was used in the pre-operative work-up of patients with various types of tumors in or near the motor cortex during a 3-year period. Data was collected prospectively in 100 patients, yet this is a post hoc report. RESULTS: Patient characteristics had no influence on the neurophysiological parameters. The response latency time was almost never different in the tumorous versus healthy hemisphere, so clinicians should be suspicious if they find interhemispheric differences for latency. A high interhemispheric ratio of resting motor threshold (RMT) or a low interhemispheric ratio of motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude appear to suggest immanent deterioration of the patient's motor status. CONCLUSION: In addition to topographic cortical mapping, TMS also serves as a neurophysiological assessment of the functional status of the patient's motor system. The results presented here provide clinicians with a set of reference values to contextualize findings in their own tumor patients. Further research is still needed to better understand the full clinical relevance of these neurophysiological parameters.