Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30234013›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2018

Postoperative Cavity Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases.

Eduardo M Marchan, Jennifer Peterson, Terence T Sio, Kaisorn L Chaichana, Anna C Harrell, Henry Ruiz-Garcia, Anita Mahajan, Paul D Brown, Daniel M Trifiletti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Metastatic Lesions of the Brain and Spine.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Eduardo M MarchanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
Jennifer PetersonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
Terence T SioDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, United States.
Kaisorn L ChaichanaDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
Anna C HarrellDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
Henry Ruiz-GarciaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.
Anita MahajanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Paul D BrownDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Daniel M TrifilettiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the past decade, tumor bed stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) after surgical resection has been increasingly utilized in the management of brain metastases. SRS has risen as an alternative to adjuvant whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), which has been shown in several studies to be associated with increased neurotoxicity. Multiple recent articles have shown favorable local control rates compared to those of WBRT. Specifically, improvements in local control can be achieved by adding a 2 mm margin around the resection cavity. Risk factors that have been established as increasing the risk of local recurrence after resection include: subtotal resection, larger treatment volume, lower margin dose, and a long delay between surgery and SRS (>3 weeks). Moreover, consensus among experts in the field have established the importance of (a) fusion of the pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging scan to aid in volume delineation (b) contouring the entire surgical tract and (c) expanding the target to include possible microscopic disease that may extend to meningeal or venous sinus territory. These strategies can minimize the risks of symptomatic radiation-induced injury and leptomeningeal dissemination after postoperative SRS. Emerging data has arisen suggesting that multifraction postoperative SRS, or alternatively, preoperative SRS could provide decreased rates of radiation necrosis and leptomeningeal disease. Future prospective randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes between these techniques are necessary in order to improve outcomes in these patients.

Indexed as

metastasispostoperativeradiationradiosurgeryresection

Identifiers

PMID30234013
PMCPMC6127288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.