Stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of essential tremor - a systematic review.

Introduction: Essential tremor (ET) is the most common movement disorder in adults, with an estimated incidence of up to 1% of the population and 5% of people older than 65 years of age. ET is manifested primarily by bilateral postural and kinetic tremor of the upper limbs with or without neurological symptoms and cognitive deficits. ET disrupts daily tasks and significantly lowers quality of life. Currently available medications alone are often insufficient to control severe symptoms. Several surgical treatment options are available, including stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)-a minimally invasive treatment option aimed at relieving and controlling tremors. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature on the use of SRS in the treatment of ET using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials.gov registry and adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: The results obtained confirm the high efficacy and safety of the SRS procedure in treating drug-resistant intention tremor. The study results present high response rate reaching 80% and achievement of manual task improvement, lessening of the tremor and increase in the quality of life of the majority of the operated patients. The method also stands out for its favorable balance between efficiency and cost. Disscusion: Stereotactic radiosurgery is a favourable, safe, efficient and cost-effective method in treatment of the essential tremor. Ongoing research is crucial to refine patient selection criteria for this procedure and further improve the effectiveness of the technique.

Brachytherapy in the Treatment of Non-Melanoma Skin Peri-Auricular Cancers-A Retrospective Analysis of a Single Institution Experience.

The location of skin neoplasms in the area of the ears qualifies patients to the so-called high-risk group. The location of neoplasms within the auricle and around the ear often causes many problems in surgical treatment. This is due to the presence of cartilage, the difficulty of performing procedures with obtaining a visually satisfactory cosmetic effect, especially in the presence of extensive lesions and can lead to positive surgical margins which leads to a high risk of recurrence. In such cases, the use of brachytherapy, both as an independent method and as a complementary method after surgery, may be an effective method of local control with an acceptable risk of radiation complications. However, there are no large retrospective studies on the use of brachytherapy in this anatomical region. The aim of the study was to analyse the effectiveness, toxicity profile, and cosmetic effect of two different brachytherapy techniques (contact and interstitial brachytherapy). Methods: This paper presents the results of a retrospective analysis of 33 patients treated with contact or interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for skin cancers of the outer ear, involving the auricle and the skin of the adjacent area. Brachytherapy was used both as a definitive treatment (15 patients­43%) and adjuvant treatment after surgery (18 patients­57%). The basic criterion for adjuvant treatment was a positive or narrow (<1 mm) resection margin. Fraction doses from 3 to 7 Gy per fraction were used at intervals from six hours (interstitial brachytherapy) to a maximum of seven days (contact brachytherapy). The treatment time ranged from 1 to 42 days, and the total dose range was 7 to 49 Gy. The follow-up was 29.75 months (range 2−64). Results: In the group of patients treated with adjuvant therapy, in the patients with post-radiation reaction, the mean time from surgery to the start of brachytherapy was 7.72 ± 3.05 weeks, the median was 8 (6−12) weeks, and in the group without post-radiation reaction, the mean time was 11.13 ± 4.41 weeks, the median time was 11 weeks (8−14). The risk of a post-radiation reaction increased significantly more often in patients with more advanced disease. In the case of contact brachytherapy, the post-radiation reaction occurred significantly more often (14/21 patients­43%) than in the case of interstitial brachytherapy (3/11 patients­9.4%). In patients with post-radiation reactions, a significantly larger volume of the skin receiving a dose of 200% was found, and the volume receiving a dose of 150% was close to statistical significance. The mean volume of the skin receiving a 200% dose in the group with post-radiation reactions was 28.05 ± 16.56 cm3, the median was 24.86 (0.5−52.3) cm3, and the mean volume in the group without post-radiation reaction was 17.98 ± 10.96 cm3, median 14.95 (3.9−44.96) cm3. The result was statistically significant (Z = 2.035, p = 0.041). Conclusion: Interstitial HDR (high-dose-rate) brachytherapy for non-melanoma skin cancers around the ear is highly effective, short, and has a relatively low burden on the patient. The toxicity of the treatment was low. In the case of contact brachytherapy, the toxicity profile is slightly higher but acceptable for patients. This method is preferred in patients in whom interstitial brachytherapy is impossible to perform due to anatomical and logistical reasons. The unquestionable advantage of contact brachytherapy is its ability to be performed on an outpatient basis without the need to stay in the hospital. No severe and late CTCAE ≥III and late RTOG ≥III toxicity was observed. In patients after surgery, in order to minimise the risk of radiation reaction, it is optimal to start treatment at least eight weeks after surgery. In the presence of extensive lesions, the use of interstitial brachytherapy seems to be more advantageous, especially when the expected volume of healthy skin in the dose range of 200% and 150% is above 15 cm3 and 50 cm3, respectively.