[Comparative analysis of Grade I vs Grade II intracranial Meningiomas in a retrospective series of 63 patients]
- PMID: 29142779
- PMCID: PMC5672660
- DOI: 10.4103/sni.sni_286_17
[Comparative analysis of Grade I vs Grade II intracranial Meningiomas in a retrospective series of 63 patients]
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to demonstrate the differences between grade I and II (OMS classification) of intracranial meningiomas. We evaluate their location, Simpson resection grade, re-operations rate, adjuvant treatment and patient outcomes.
Methods: We conduct a retrospective review of Sixty- three clinical records of patients who were diagnosed with meningiomas grade I and II (OMS) between 2009-2015 and received surgical treatment at our Hospital. We evaluated different variables such as age, sex, histological type, Simpson grade resection, location, symptoms, radiotherapy, follow-up, mortality rate and patient outcome. The main aim was to establish the differences between these intracranial tumors.
Results: A total of sixty-three patients diagnosed with meningiomas and received surgical treatment; fifty-one were grade I and thirteen with grade II. There were no differences in the rate between man and women. The average age for both types of meningiomas was 57 years old. The typical meningiomas were located in 55% of the cases outside the cranial base vs. 91.6% of the atypical meningiomas (P = 0.03). Typical meningioma had a Simpson resection grade of I, II and III in 74.5% against 58.3% of the atypical (P = 0.2). The atypical meningioma in 33% had more than one-stage surgery vs. 9.8% of the typical (P = 0.03). The patients with a typical meningioma showed a good outcome in 86.2% vs. 53.8 of the grade II (P = 0, 01). The typical meningiomas showed a good outcome in 82.2% of the cases vs. 53.8% of the atypical. The grade II meningiomas received adjuvant treatment in 33.3%, while the grade I only 1.9%.
Conclusions: The atypical intracranial meningiomas have a worse outcome compared with the typical kind and a higher incidence of re-operations. These tumors have a preference for a location outside the cranial base. Concluding that the location could be a risk factor.
Introducción:: Los meningiomas Grado II tienen un comportamiento biológico más agresivo que los Grado I. A partir del año 2007, con los nuevos criterios de clasificación, la incidencia de meningiomas atípicos reportada aumentó hasta un 35%.
Objetivo:: Establecer diferencias entre los Meningiomas Grado I y II de la clasificación de la OMS, en lo que respecta a: grados de resección de Simpson, localización tumoral, necesidad de reintervención, tratamiento adyuvante, evolución y mortalidad.
Métodos:: Estudio retrospectivo de 63 pacientes operados entre el periodo 2009-2015.
Variables analizadas:: sexo, edad, grado histológico, localización, grado de resección quirúrgica, radioterapia adyuvante, mortalidad y evolución.
Resultados:: Se analizaron 63 pacientes: 51 Grado I y 12 Grado II de la clasificación de la OMS. La distribución por sexo no mostró diferencias entre meningiomas benignos y atípicos. Tampoco el grupo etario de presentación; mediana de 57 años. Un 55% de los meningiomas benignos se localizaron fuera de la base del cráneo versus el 91,6% de los meningiomas atípicos (P = 0.02). En el 74,5% de los meningiomas benignos se logró una resección total (Simpson I-II-III) versus el 58.3% para los atípicos (P = 0.3). Se reintervinieron el 33,3% de meningiomas atípicos en comparación con el 9.8% de los benignos (P = 0.03). Tuvieron una buena evolución el 86,2% de los benignos vs el 53,8% de los GII (P = 0.01). Realizaron radioterapia adyuvante el 33,3% de los meningiomas Grado II vs el 1,9% de los Grado I.
Conclusiones:: Los meningiomas atípicos cerebrales tienen peor pronóstico evolutivo que los Grado I de la OMS. Presentan una mayor tasa de reintervención y se localizan más frecuentemente fuera de la base del cráneo. La localización pareciera ser un factor de riesgo para el desarrollo de meningiomas atípicos.
Conflict of interest statement
There are no conflicts of interest.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Adjuvant radiation for WHO grade II and III intracranial meningiomas: insights on survival and practice patterns from a National Cancer Registry.J Neurooncol. 2020 Sep;149(2):293-303. doi: 10.1007/s11060-020-03604-7. Epub 2020 Aug 28. J Neurooncol. 2020. PMID: 32860156
-
Clinical characteristics and management differences for grade II and III spinal meningiomas.J Neurooncol. 2021 Jun;153(2):313-320. doi: 10.1007/s11060-021-03771-1. Epub 2021 May 10. J Neurooncol. 2021. PMID: 33973145
-
Long-term prognosis for atypical and malignant meningiomas: a study of 71 surgical cases.J Neurosurg. 1997 May;86(5):793-800. doi: 10.3171/jns.1997.86.5.0793. J Neurosurg. 1997. PMID: 9126894
-
Long-term surgical outcomes of spinal meningiomas.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 May 1;37(10):E617-23. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31824167f1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012. PMID: 22146282 Review.
-
Role of adjuvant radiotherapy in atypical (WHO grade II) and anaplastic (WHO grade III) meningiomas: a systematic review.Clin Transl Oncol. 2021 Feb;23(2):205-221. doi: 10.1007/s12094-020-02434-3. Epub 2020 Jul 10. Clin Transl Oncol. 2021. PMID: 32651886
Cited by
-
Adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation following gross total resection for atypical meningioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Radiat Oncol. 2021 Feb 17;16(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s13014-021-01759-9. Radiat Oncol. 2021. PMID: 33596974 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Buttrick S, Shah AH, Komotar RJ, Ivan ME. Management of Atypical and Anaplastic Meningiomas. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2016;27:239–47. - PubMed
-
- Goyal LK, Suh JH, Mohan DS, Prayson RA, Lee J, Barnett GH. Local control and overall survival in atypical meningioma: A retrospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46:57–61. - PubMed
-
- Jääskeläinen J. Seemingly complete removal of histologically benign intracranial meningioma: Late recurrence rate and factors predicting recurrence in 657 patients. A multivariate analysis. Surg Neurol. 1986;26:461–9. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources