These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Vestibular schwannoma growth: the continuing controversy.
    Author: Charabi S, Tos M, Thomsen J, Charabi B, Mantoni M.
    Journal: Laryngoscope; 2000 Oct; 110(10 Pt 1):1720-5. PubMed ID: 11037833.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the growth of vestibular schwannoma (VS) in a series of 123 patients with 127 tumors allocated to the "wait and scan" group in the period 1973-1999. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively registered data on all patients with VSIE from the entire country who were allocated to the wait and scan group. METHOD: Clinical charts, audiometric data, and neuroradiological images were reviewed and tabulated for age, hearing level expressed as speech reception threshold (SRT) and speech discrimination score (SDS), maximum extra-canalicular tumor extension, and possible changes in tumor diameter. The material was updated three times (in June 1993, June 1996, and June 1999). Via the Danish national register, data on whether the included patients were alive or dead were collected in 1999. RESULTS: The tumor growth, growth rate, and growth patterns were calculated in three periods 1973 to 1993 (mean observation period, 3.4 y), 1973 to 1996 (mean observation period, 3.8 y), and from 1973 to 1999 (mean observation period, 4.2 y). By termination of the first period, 94 tumors (74%) exhibited measurable growth, 23 tumors (18%) no measurable growth, and 10 tumors (8%) revealed negative growth. By the end of the extended observation period, tumor growth was observed in 104 tumors (82%), no tumor growth in 15 tumors (12%), and negative growth in 8 tumors (6%). Subsequent to the third observation period, growth was observed in 108 tumors (85%), no growth in 11 tumors (9%) and negative growth in 8 tumors (6%). However, the results may also be interpreted in another way: 52 patients (42%) were alive at the time of writing, tumor growth did not demand any intervention, 23 patients (19%) died as a result of non-tumor-related causes, and 35 patients (28%) were previously treated and alive by the termination of the third observation period. CONCLUSION: Depending on the observation period, three sets of growth results were obtained. The long observation period, updating and re-updating the results, gave us the opportunity for a de novo interpretation of the results and the long-term consequences of the wait and scan policy. Combined with other factors, the achieved results should be considered when timing of surgery is to be decided.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]