Journal of neurosurgery
-
Journal of neurosurgery · Feb 2015
Case ReportsPetroclival meningiomas resected via a combined transpetrosal approach: surgical outcomes in 60 cases and a new scoring system for clinical evaluation.
Petroclival meningiomas are among the most challenging intracranial tumors to treat surgically. Many skull base approaches have been described to improve resection and decrease patient morbidity. The authors undertook this study to evaluate the results of their treatment of petroclival meningiomas using objective measurements of tumor volume and a new impairment scoring system to assess neurological symptoms that severely affect the patient's quality of life, such as impairment of swallowing and speaking, motor function, and consciousness and communication. ⋯ The combined transpetrosal approach has provided satisfactory functional improvements and excellent tumor control for patients with petroclival meningiomas. The PCMIS provides a specific tool for quantitative assessment of the patient's state.
-
Journal of neurosurgery · Feb 2015
Biography Historical ArticleMarching beyond the sella: Gerard Guiot and his contributions to neurosurgery.
Gerard Guiot (1912-1998) was one of the most renowned and innovative neurosurgeons of the 20th century. His pivotal and revolutionary role in advancing transsphenoidal surgery has been recorded in many historical vignettes, yet his outstanding contributions to the advancement of neurosurgery outside the confines of the sella have not been described in a detailed fashion. In this article, the authors discuss the life and achievements of Professor Guiot and present a comprehensive description of his contributions to the field of neurosurgery, including cerebrovascular, spine, craniofacial, stereotactic functional, and endoscopic surgery.
-
Journal of neurosurgery · Feb 2015
ReviewOutcome methods used in clinical studies of Chiari malformation Type I: a systematic review.
Chiari malformation Type I (CM-I) is a common and often debilitating neurological disease. Efforts to improve treatment of CM-I are impeded by inconsistent and limited methods of evaluating clinical outcomes. To understand current approaches and lay a foundation for future research, the authors conducted a systematic review of the methods used in original published research articles to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients treated for CM-I. ⋯ The methods used to evaluate clinical outcomes in CM-I are inconsistent and frequently not comparable, complicating efforts to analyze results across studies. Development, validation, and incorporation of a small number of disease-specific patient-based instruments will improve the quality of research and care of CM-I patients.