Growth prediction in asymptomatic meningiomas: the utility of the AIMSS score

Background Management of asymptomatic meningiomas represents a challenge due to the absence of a solid consensus on which is the best management strategy. There are various known factors predicting meningiomas growth risk. However, the Asian Intracranial Meningioma Scoring System (AIMSS) is the only...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta neurochirurgica 2019-11, Vol.161 (11), p.2233-2240
Hauptverfasser: Brugada-Bellsolà, Ferran, Teixidor Rodríguez, Pilar, Rodríguez-Hernández, Ana, Garcia-Armengol, Roser, Tardáguila, Manel, González-Crespo, Antonio, Domínguez, Carlos J., Rimbau, Jordi M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Management of asymptomatic meningiomas represents a challenge due to the absence of a solid consensus on which is the best management strategy. There are various known factors predicting meningiomas growth risk. However, the Asian Intracranial Meningioma Scoring System (AIMSS) is the only described score to quantify such risk thus emerging as a potential tool for management decisions. This study aims to validate this score on our series of asymptomatic meningiomas. Method We performed a retrospective review of asymptomatic meningiomas diagnosed at our institution between January 2008 and October 2016 and followed by an annual cerebral Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). For each lesion, the AIMSS score was calculated thus classifying them in low (0–2), intermediate (3–6) or high risk (7–11) of rapid growth (>2cm 3 /year). We investigated the correlation between the expected Average Growth Rate (AGR) according to the score and the one obtained in our study. The mean growth velocity over the different risk groups was also compared. Results Overall, 69 asymptomatic meningiomas found incidentally in 46 patients were included in the study; 31 were assigned to the low-risk group, 34 to the intermediate-risk group and 4 to the high-risk group. Attending to the AGR, 0% showed rapid growth in the low-risk group, 12% in the intermediate-risk group, and 25% in the high-risk group. The mean growth velocity showed a significant difference over the different risk groups ( p  
ISSN:0001-6268
0942-0940
DOI:10.1007/s00701-019-04056-3