Dataset Information

Global comparison of awake and asleep mapping procedures in glioma surgery: An international multicenter survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mapping techniques are frequently used to preserve neurological function during glioma surgery. There is, however, no consensus regarding the use of many variables of these techniques. Currently, there are almost no objective data available about potential heterogeneity between surgeons and centers. The goal of this survey is therefore to globally identify, evaluate and analyze the local mapping procedures in glioma surgery.

Methods

The survey was distributed to members of the neurosurgical societies of the Netherlands (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Neurochirurgie-NVVN), Europe (European Association of Neurosurgical Societies-EANS), and the United States (Congress of Neurological Surgeons-CNS) between December 2020 and January 2021 with questions about awake mapping, asleep mapping, assessment of neurological morbidity, and decision making.

Results

Survey responses were obtained from 212 neurosurgeons from 42 countries. Overall, significant differences were observed for equipment and its settings that are used for both awake and asleep mapping, intraoperative assessment of eloquent areas, the use of surgical adjuncts and monitoring, anesthesia management, assessment of neurological morbidity, and perioperative decision making. Academic practices performed awake and asleep mapping procedures more often and employed a clinical neurophysiologist with telemetric monitoring more frequently. European neurosurgeons differed from US neurosurgeons regarding the modality for cortical/subcortical mapping and awake/asleep mapping, the use of surgical adjuncts, and anesthesia management during awake mapping.

Discussion

This survey demonstrates the heterogeneity among surgeons and centers with respect to their procedures for awake mapping, asleep mapping, assessing neurological morbidity, and decision making in glioma patients. These data invite further evaluations for key variables that can be optimized and may therefore benefit from consensus.

SUBMITTER: Gerritsen JKW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8965050 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Extraoperative electrical stimulation mapping (ESM) to identify functional cortex is performed prior to neurosurgical resection at epilepsy surgery programs worldwide. However, the procedure remains unstandardized, with no established clinical guidelines. We sought to determine the current range in ESM practice parameters across established epilepsy surgery centers.We developed and distributed a 31-question survey to 220 epilepsy centers worldwide regarding current practice parameters of ESM. Questions addressed preoperative assessment, technical stimulation parameters, language testing protocols, criteria for identification of positive or negative functional sites, management of mapping complications, and postoperative functional outcome.Survey responses were obtained from 56 centers. These revealed marked practice variability in virtually all aspects of the ESM procedure. These aspects included critical procedure components such as electrical stimulation settings, the types of language functions tested, the operational definition of a language error, size of surgical resection margin, cortical locations mapped for language, testing in the presence of afterdischarges, and medical management of mapping complications. Forty-one percent of centers reported at least one persistent adverse language outcome despite preserving all eloquent sites defined by their stimulation mapping procedure.The striking variations in practice across centers are likely to influence mapping results, which directly affect the boundaries of cortical resection and, consequently, might worsen either seizure or functional outcomes. Clearly, adverse functional outcomes occur despite mapping procedures that were perceived to be adequate. Investigation of critical technical and procedural aspects of stimulation mapping is warranted, with the ultimate goal of establishing empirically based practice guidelines to improve the safety and efficacy of ESM and resective epilepsy surgery. A PowerPoint slide summarizing this article is available for download in the Supporting Information section here.

Project description:BackgroundAwake craniotomy (AC) has become gold standard in surgical resection of gliomas located in eloquent areas. The conscious sedation techniques in AC include both monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and asleep-awake-asleep (AAA). The choice of optimal anesthetic method depends on the preferences of the surgical team (mainly anesthesiologist and neurosurgeon). The aim of this study was to compare the difference in physiological and blood gas data, dosage of different drugs, the probability of switching to endotracheal intubation, and extent of tumor resection and dysfunction after operation between AAA and MAC anesthetic management for resection of gliomas in eloquent brain areas.MethodsTwo-hundred and twenty-five patients with super-tentorial tumor located in eloquent areas underwent AC from 2009 to 2021 in Xijing Hospital. Forty-one patients underwent AAA technique, and the rest one-hundred eighty-four patients underwent MAC technique. Anesthetic management, dosage of different drugs, intraoperative complications, postoperative outcomes, adverse events, extent of resection and motor, and sensory and language dysfunction after operation were compared between MAC and AAA.ResultThere was no significant difference in gender, KPS score, MMSE score, glioma grade, type, and growth site between the patients in the two groups, except the older age of patients in MAC group than that in AAA group. During the whole process of operation, there were greater pulse pressure difference (P = 0.046), shorter operation time (P = 0.039), less dosage of remifentanil (P = 0.000), more dosage of dexmedetomidine (P = 0.013), more use of antiemetics (81%, P = 0.0067), lower use of vasoactive agent (45.1%, P = 0.010), and lower probability of conversion to general anesthesia (GA, P = 0.027) in MAC group than that in AAA group. Blood gas analysis showed that PetCO2 (P = 0.000), Glu concentration (P = 0.000), and PaCO2 (P = 0.000) were higher, but SPO2 (P = 0.002) and PaO2 (P = 0.000) were lower in MAC group than that in AAA group. In the postoperative recovery stage, compared with that of AAA group, the probability of dysfunction in MAC group at 1, 3, 5, and 7 days after operation was lower, which were 27.8% vs 53.6% (P = 0.003), 31% vs 68.3% (P = 0.000), 28.8% vs 63.4% (P = 0.000), and 25.6% vs 58.5% (P = 0.000), respectively.ConclusionCompared with AAA, it seems that MAC has more advantages in the management for resection of gliomas in eloquent brain areas, and MAC combined with multiple monitoring such as cerebral cortical mapping, neuronavigation, and ultrasonic detection is worthy of popularization for the resection of gliomas in eloquent brain areas.

Project description:Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world.A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery.The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p < 0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%).The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal.