8. Premeatal and retromeatal cerebellopontine angle meningioma: Diagnosis and surgical results

Pham Duy, Kieu Dinh Hung, Do Thi Thanh Toan

Main Article Content

Abstract

Cerebellopontine angle (CPA) meningiomas are the second most common tumor of the CPA. Depending on the location of tumor attachment to the dura mater, the relationship between the tumor and critical neurovascular structures of the CPA is different. This study assessed the clinical symptoms, imaging and surgical treatments of CPA meningiomas. From August 2020 to August 2022, 33 patients with CPA meningiomas were at Viet Duc Hospital; 27 were females (85%) and 6 (15%) were males. The mean age was 54 ± 12 years. Based on the location of the tumor relative to the internal auditory canal (IAC), there were 16 cases of premeatal (49%) and 17 cases of retromeatal (51%). Compared to the premeatal group, on average, those in the retromeatal group had later time of diagnosis after clinical symptoms (16.5 months vs 9.7 months). The average tumor sizes between the 2 groups were not statistically different, but when there was brainstem compression, the average tumor size of retromeatal group was larger (49mm vs 44mm). The clinical presentations of the retromeatal group were related to the cerebellar symptoms, while symptoms in the premeatal group were all related to trigeminal neuropathy. The percentage of gross-total resection in the premeatal group was 31% and in the retrometal group was 71%. The rates of preserving the facial nerve function in the premeatal group were lower than the retromeatal group (44% vs 82%). Postoperative Karnofsky score of the retromeatal group improved while the score of premeatal group did not change. The meningiomas’ relative location anterior or posterior to the IAC is related to clinical symptoms and correct classification of CPA meningiomas is important in making diagnosis, surgical strategy as well as surgical outcomes.

Article Details

References

1. Samii M, Gerganov V. Surgery of Cerebellopontine Lesions. Springer; 2013.
2. Bassiouni H, Hunold A, Asgari S, Stolke D. Meningiomas of the posterior petrous bone: functional outcome after microsurgery. J Neurosurg. Jun 2004; 100(6): 1014-24. doi:10.3171/jns.2004.100.6.1014.
3. Schaller B MA, Gratzl O, Probst R Premeatal and retromeatal cerebellopontine angle meningioma. Two distinct clinical entities. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1999;141(5):465–471.
4. Agarwal V, Babu R, Grier J, et al. Cerebellopontine angle meningiomas: postoperative outcomes in a modern cohort. Neurosurg Focus. Dec 2013; 35(6): E10. doi:10.3171/2013.10.FOCUS13367.
5. Voss NF VF, Heilman CB, Robertson JH Meningiomas of the cerebellopontine angle. Surg Neurol. 2000; 53(5): 439–446.
6. Franco DeMonte MWM, Ossama Al-Mefty. Al-Mefty’s Meningiomas. 2nd ed. Thieme; 2011.
7. Nakamura M RF, Dormiani M, Matthies C, Vorkapic P, Samii M. Facial and cochlear nerve function after surgery of cerebellopontine angle meningiomas. Neurosurgery. 2005; 57(1): 77–90.
8. Hunter JB, Weaver KD, Thompson RC, Wanna GB. Petroclival meningiomas. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. Jun 2015; 48(3): 477-90. doi:10.1016/j.otc.2015.02.007.
9. Kane AJ, Sughrue ME, Rutkowski MJ, Berger MS, McDermott MW, Parsa AT. Clinical and surgical considerations for cerebellopontine angle meningiomas. J Clin Neurosci. Jun 2011; 18(6): 755-9. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2010.09.023.
10. Baroncini M TL, Reyns N, Schapira S, Vincent C, Lejeune JP. Retrosigmoid approach for meningiomas of the cerebellopontine angle: results of surgery and place of additional treatments. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011; 153(10): 1931-40. doi:10.1007/s00701-011-1090-6.
11. Sekhar LN PJJ. Cerebellopontine angle meningiomas: Microsurgical excision and follow-up results. J Neurosurg. 1984; 60: 500-505.
12. Thomas NW, King TT. Meningiomas of the cerebellopontine angle. A report of 41 cases. Br J Neurosurg. Feb 1996; 10(1): 59-68. doi:10.1080/02688699650040539.
13. Xu F, Karampelas I, Megerian CA, Selman WR, Bambakidis NC. Petroclival meningiomas: an update on surgical approaches, decision making, and treatment results. Neurosurg Focus. Dec 2013; 35(6): E11. doi:10.3171/2013.9.FOCUS13319.
14. D’Amico RS, Banu MA, Petridis P, et al. Efficacy and outcomes of facial nerve-sparing treatment approach to cerebellopontine angle meningiomas. J Neurosurg. Dec 2017; 127(6): 1231-1241. doi:10.3171/2016.10.JNS161982.
15. Wu ZB, Yu CJ, Guan SS. Posterior petrous meningiomas: 82 cases. J Neurosurg. Feb 2005; 102(2): 284-9. doi:10.3171/jns.2005.102.2.0284.