Comparison of Motor Outcome in Patients Undergoing Awake vs General Anesthesia Surgery for Brain Tumors Located Within or Adjacent to the Motor Pathways.

BACKGROUND: Surgical removal of intra-axial brain tumors aims at maximal tumor resection while preserving function. The potential benefit of awake craniotomy over craniotomy under general anesthesia (GA) for motor preservation is yet unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent surgery for perirolandic tumors while either awake or under GA. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2015, 1126 patients underwent surgical resection of newly diagnosed intra-axial tumors in a single institution. Data from 85 patients (44 awake, 41 GA) with full dataset who underwent resections for perirolandic tumors were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Identification of the motor cortex required significantly higher stimulation thresholds in anesthetized patients (9.1 ± 4 vs 6.2 ± 2.7 mA for awake patients, P = .0008). There was no group difference in the subcortical threshold for motor response used to assess the proximity of the lesion to the corticospinal (pyramidal) tract. High-grade gliomas were the most commonly treated pathology. The extent of resection and residual tumor volume were not different between groups. Postoperative motor deficits were more common in the anesthetized patients at 1 wk (P = .046), but no difference between the groups was detected at 3 mo. Patients in the GA group had a longer mean length of hospitalization (10.3 vs 6.7 d for the awake group, P = .003). CONCLUSION: Awake craniotomy results in a better early postoperative motor outcome and shorter hospitalization compared with patients who underwent the same surgery under GA. The finding of higher cortical thresholds for the identification of the motor cortex in anesthetized patients may suggest an inhibitory effect of anesthetic agents on motor function.

Intraoperative mapping and monitoring of the corticospinal tracts with neurophysiological assessment and 3-dimensional ultrasonography-based navigation. Clinical article.

OBJECT: Preserving motor function is a major challenge in surgery for intraaxial brain tumors. Navigation systems are unreliable in predicting the location of the corticospinal tracts (CSTs) because of brain shift and the inability of current intraoperative systems to produce reliable diffusion tensor imaging data. The authors describe their experience with elaborate neurophysiological assessment and tractography-based navigation, corrected in real time by 3D intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS) to identify motor pathways during subcortical tumor resection. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted in 55 patients undergoing resection of tumors located within or in proximity to the CSTs at the authors' institution between November 2007 and June 2009. Corticospinal tract tractography was coregistered to surgical navigation-derived images in 42 patients. Direct cortical-stimulated motor evoked potentials (dcMEPs) and subcortical-stimulated MEPs (scrtMEPs) were recorded intraoperatively to assess function and estimate the distance from the CSTs. Intraoperative ultrasonography updated the navigation imaging and estimated resection proximity to the CSTs. Preoperative clinical motor function was compared with postoperative outcome at several time points and correlated with incidences of intraoperative dcMEP alarm and low scrtMEP values. RESULTS: The threshold level needed to elicit scrtMEPs was plotted against the distance to the CSTs based on diffusion tensor imaging tractography after brain shift compensation with 3D IOUS, generating a trend line that demonstrated a linear order between these variables, and a relationship of 0.97 mA for every 1 mm of brain tissue distance from the CSTs. Clinically, 39 (71%) of 55 patients had no postoperative deficits, and 9 of the remaining 16 improved to baseline function within 1 month. Seven patients had varying degrees of permanent motor deficits. Subcortical stimulation was applied in 45 of the procedures. The status of 32 patients did not deteriorate postoperatively (stable or improved motor status): 27 of them (84%) displayed minimum scrtMEP thresholds > 7 mA. Six patients who experienced postoperative deterioration quickly recovered (within 5 days) and displayed minimum scrtMEP thresholds > 6.8 mA. Five of the 7 patients who had late (> 5 days postoperatively) or no recovery had minimal scrtMEP thresholds < 3 mA. An scrtMEP threshold of 3 mA was found to be the cutoff point below which irreversible disruption of CST integrity may be anticipated (sensitivity 83%, specificity 95%). CONCLUSIONS: Combining elaborate neurophysiological assessment, tractography-based neuronavigation, and updated IOUS images provided accurate localization of the CSTs and enabled the safe resection of tumors approximating these tracts. This is the first attempt to evaluate the distance from the CSTs using the threshold of subcortical monopolar stimulation with real-time IOUS for the correction of brain shift. The linear correlation between the distance to the CSTs and the threshold of subcortical stimulation producing a motor response provides an intraoperative technique to better preserve motor function.