Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Single-session stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has limited role for large arteriovenous malformations (AVM). Volume-staged SRS (VS-SRS) is used to optimize outcomes, but studies reporting results are limited. METHODS:This multicenter retrospective cohort of 378 patients from 21 centers reports results of VS-SRS for the entire AVM nidus. We report favorable outcome, obliteration, hemorrhage, and permanent symptomatic adverse radiation effect rates. RESULTS:The median age was 31 years (IQR: 19-44) at the first volume stage, with patients treated in 2-4 stages. The median total nidus volume was 21 cm3 (IQR: 13.9-30.1 cm3), and a median prescription dose of 17 Gy (IQR: 16-18 Gy) was used. The median radiographic and clinical follow-up were 48 and 55 months, respectively. Seventy-seven patients (20.4%) had a favorable outcome, with the 3-year and 5-year rates being 3.9% and 18%, respectively. 127 patients (33.6%) achieved obliteration, with the 3-year and 5-year rates being 6.8% and 26%, respectively. Obliteration rates of AVMs <15 cm3 were 81% and 31%, respectively. The latency period hemorrhage incidence rate was 3.02 cases per 100 patient-years; 52 patients (13.8%) had a bleed. Seventy-two patients (19%) had symptomatic adverse radiation effect; in 38 patients (10.1%), these were permanent. Total nidus volume, prescription dose at first stage, diffuse nidus, and prior hemorrhage were all independent affecting outcome rates. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:VS-SRS can be used to treat large AVMs as a standalone treatment. Obliteration rates and favorable outcomes are lower than that with smaller AVMs, and repeat treatment is often required. Optimizing treatment plans, by increasing prescription doses, reducing treatment volume at each stage, and increasing the number of stages, may lead to better outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Gynecological cancers represent 10% to 15% of cancers in women, but brain metastases (BM) are uncommon, with limited evidence regarding their management. This study investigates the role of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for BM from primary gynecological cancers. METHODS:Institutions of the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation participated in this study. Inclusion criteria required histological diagnosis of epithelial ovarian, cervical, or endometrial cancer, SRS between 2000 and 2020, and at least 1 imaging or clinical follow-up. RESULTS:A total of 276 patients having SRS for 977 BM were included. Median age at SRS was 62 years (IQR, 55-70). Primary cancer origin was ovarian in 128 (46%), cervical in 43 (16%), and endometrial in 105 patients (38%). Median Karnofsky Performance Scale was 80%, and systemic disease was active in 124 (45%) of patients. A median of 1 metastasis was treated (IQR, 1-3) per patient. Median individual metastasis volume was 0.27 cc (IQR, 0.05-1.59 cc). The majority (91%) received single-fraction SRS, using a median margin dose of 18 Gy (IQR, 16-20 Gy). Actuarial overall survival was 77%, 65%, and 44% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Predictors of worsened survival included older age, cervical and endometrial primary, previous whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), active systemic disease, worsened Karnofsky Performance Scale, absence of subsequent surgery, and increasing number of BM. Actuarial local control was 94% at 6 months, 89% at 12 months, and 78% at 24 months. Previous SRS or WBRT, tumor bed treatment, and cervical histology increased the risk of local failure. New remote BM and leptomeningeal dissemination occurred in 44% and 11% of patients, respectively. Adverse radiation effects (ARE) occurred in 13% of cases but were symptomatic in only 3%. Previous WBRT or SRS and increased tumor diameter increased the risk of ARE. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:SRS is an effective management for BM from gynecological cancers with low risks of symptomatic ARE.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The Congress of Neurological Surgeons Self-Assessment for Neurological Surgeons questions are widely used by neurosurgical residents to prepare for written board examinations. Recently, these questions have also served as benchmarks for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) neurosurgical knowledge. LLMs show significant promise for transforming neurosurgical practice; however, they are susceptible to in-text distractions and confounding factors. Given the increasing use of generative artificial intelligence and ambient dictation technologies, clinical text is at a larger risk for the inclusion of extraneous details. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs on neurosurgery board-like questions and to evaluate their robustness to the inclusion of distractor statements. METHODS:A comprehensive evaluation was conducted using 28 state-of-the-art LLMs. These models were tested on 2904 neurosurgery board examination questions derived from the Congress of Neurological Surgeons Self-Assessment for Neurological Surgeons. In addition, the study introduced a distraction framework to assess the fragility of these models. The framework incorporated simple, irrelevant distractor statements containing polysemous words with clinical meanings used in nonclinical contexts to determine the extent to which such distractions degrade model performance on standard medical benchmarks. RESULTS:Six of the 28 tested LLMs achieved board-passing outcomes, with the top-performing models scoring over 15.7% above the passing threshold. When exposed to distractions, accuracy across various model architectures was significantly reduced-by as much as 20.4%-with 1 model failing that had previously passed. Both general-purpose and medical open-source models experienced greater performance declines compared with proprietary variants when subjected to the added distractors. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:While current LLMs demonstrate an impressive ability to answer neurosurgery board-like examination questions, their performance is markedly vulnerable to extraneous, distracting information. These findings underscore the critical need for developing novel mitigation strategies aimed at bolstering LLM resilience against in-text distractions, particularly for safe and effective clinical deployment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Repeat stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a noninvasive option for recurrent vestibular schwannoma (VS). This study evaluates outcomes in patients with long-term follow-up. METHODS:This retrospective multicenter study analyzed 81 patients with recurrent unilateral sporadic VS after initial SRS, with ≥12 months of follow-up. Outcomes included tumor control, hearing preservation, cranial nerve function, and adverse radiation effects (ARE). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression identified factors affecting outcomes. RESULTS:The median age at the second SRS was 60 years, with a median interval of 58 months between procedures. The median margin doses were 12.0 Gy (single-fraction), 17.25 Gy (3-fraction), and 25 Gy (5-fraction). Tumor control was achieved in 69 patients (85.2%), with 5- and 10-year local control rates of 82% and 76.5%, respectively. Significant predictors of local failure included tumor volume >2.2 cm3 (area under the curve = 0.757, P = .018), prescription biological effective dose (BED) ≤70.3 Gy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89, P = .003), and interval between treatments >27.5 months (HR: 1.02, P = .015). In single-fraction SRS, higher prescription dose reduced failure risk (HR: 0.31, P = .002) with a margin dose ≥12 Gy being critical for improved tumor control (P < .001). Serviceable hearing was retained in 12 of 18 cases (66.7%), and facial nerve function was preserved in 72 of 80 cases (90%). ARE occurred in 11 patients (13.6%), most commonly perilesional edema (63.7%). ARE correlated with higher brainstem maximum BED in the entire cohort (HR: 1.02, P = .016) and in single-fraction SRS (HR: 1.02, P = .006). Pseudoprogression (9.8%) was linked to younger age (HR: 0.88, P = .023) and shorter time between SRS (HR: 0.87, P = .012). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Repeat SRS is an effective option for recurrent sporadic VS, offering high tumor control and functional preservation. Outcomes depend on age, interval between treatments, tumor volume, and BED. With careful planning, adverse effects are rare and typically transient.

OBJECTIVE:Mentorship and training relationships shape the careers and influence of neurosurgeons. Network analysis can reveal structural characteristics and key individuals who support network connectivity and drive the field's development. This endeavor analyzed the U.S.-based neurosurgical training network derived from NeurosurGen.com. METHODS:A network graph was constructed representing neurosurgical training relationships, including chairperson-trainee, program director-trainee, and coresident connections. Graph- and node-level metrics, with a focus on centrality measures, were calculated for a trainer-trainee subgraph. RESULTS:The network consisted of 8840 neurosurgeons represented as nodes, and 382,143 relationships represented as edges. It evolved from an early small-world structure to a hierarchical and decentralized structure dominated by local clusters. Demographic shifts over time reflected increasing diversity and inclusion, with greater representation of female, Hispanic, Asian, and Black trainees across 285 training programs. Nodes were preferentially connected via residency, and the connectivity among underrepresented populations improved in concert with increased representation. Harvey W. Cushing was the quintessential neurosurgeon-influencer in the United States, ranking highly across most centrality measures over time. CONCLUSIONS:The neurosurgical training network is sparse but interconnected, typical of large real-world professional networks. While many small groups of neurosurgeons are closely tied within their immediate training hierarchy and peer group, in modern neurosurgery, each surgeon is only connected to a small fraction of the total network. Highly central individuals have played critical roles in linking disparate groups and shaping network structure. Increasing diversity in recent decades indicates progress toward inclusivity, although overall representation remains low.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Neurosurgical clinical research depends on medical data collection and evaluation that is often laborious, time consuming, and inefficient. The goal of this work was to implement and evaluate a novel departmental data infrastructure (Neuro Data Hub) designed to provide specialized data services for neurosurgical research. Data acquisition would become available purely by request. METHODS:through collaboration between Department Leadership and Medical Center Information Technology, integrating it with Institutional Review Board workflows and an existing Epic electronic health record Datalake infrastructure. The system implementation included monthly departmental meetings and an asynchronous Research Electronic Data Capture-based request system. Data requests submitted between August 2023 and November 2024 were analyzed and categorized as basic, complex, or Natural Language Processing (NLP)-augmented, with optional visualization and database creation services. Request volumes, types, and execution times were assessed. RESULTS:The Hub processed 39 research data requests (2.6/month), comprising 3 basic, 22 complex, and 14 NLP-augmented requests. Two complex requests included visualization services, and one NLP request included database creation. Average request execution time was 36.5 days, with NLP-augmented requests showing increasing adoption over time. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The Neuro Data Hub represents a paradigm shift from centralized to department-level data services, providing specialized support for neurosurgical research and democratizing access to institutional data. While effective, implementation may be limited by institutional information technology infrastructure requirements. This model could serve as a template for any form of medical-clinical research program seeking to improve data accessibility and research capabilities.

Background Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) in eloquent brain regions pose significant challenges due to the increased risk of neurologic deficits associated with treatment. Although stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and endovascular embolization are used as standalone approaches, their comparative outcomes in eloquent brain AVMs remain unclear. Purpose To directly compare the outcomes of standalone endovascular embolization versus SRS for patients with AVMs in the eloquent brain. Materials and Methods This retrospective multicenter study analyzed patients with AVMs located in eloquent brain regions treated with standalone SRS or embolization from January 2010 to December 2023 as part of the Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs, or MISTA, consortium. Angiographic outcomes were assessed using digital subtraction arterial angiography, MR angiography, or CT angiography. Propensity score weighting (PSW) was used to account for baseline differences. Results A total of 119 patients were included (median age, 35 years [IQR, 21-54 years]; 64 female), with 96 patients treated with SRS and 23 with embolization. SRS achieved 71% (61 of 86 patients) complete obliteration at last follow-up compared with 56% (10 of 18 patients) in the embolization group (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; P = .20) before adjustment. After PSW, SRS achieved higher odds of complete obliteration at last follow-up (OR, 15.58; P = .001) compared with embolization. Before PSW, the SRS group had higher rates of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores 0-2 at last follow-up (95% [86 of 91 patients] vs 71% [15 of 21 patients]; OR, 6.8; P = .004) and a lower rate of hemorrhagic complications (5.2% [five of 96 patients] vs 26% [six of 23 patients]; OR, 0.15; P = .005) compared with embolization. Mortality rates were 2.1% (two of 96) in the SRS group and 4.3% (one of 23) in the embolization group (OR, 0.46; P = .54). After PSW, there was no evidence of a difference between SRS and embolization in mRS scores 0-2 (OR, 2.04; P = .45) or hemorrhagic complications (OR, 0.60; P = .63). Conclusion SRS was associated with a higher obliteration rate compared with embolization in patients with eloquent brain AVMs, whereas there was no evidence of a difference in functional outcomes or complications after adjustment. © RSNA, 2025 See also the editorial by Russell in this issue.

Gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery is one of the most common procedures performed to manage patients with vestibular schwannoma. With a history that spans over 40 years, there has been continued evolution in radiosurgery technique and understanding of outcomes. The goal has always been to achieve long-term inactivation of tumor growth, commonly with tumor volumetric regression, and preservation of neurologic function. Challenges remain particularly pertaining to hearing preservation and other related symptoms such as those related to balance and tinnitus. Current discussions span a variety of topics including the importance of cochlear dose, the timing of the radiosurgery intervention as opposed to initial observation, the interpretation of imaging changes after radiosurgery, and the value of hearing augmentation strategies.

The current management of vestibular schwannomas (VS) includes observation, microsurgery, and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or radiotherapy. Both microsurgery (MS) and irradiation have the potential for treatment failures. For microsurgical failures, options include observation, revision surgery, and SRS. SRS is most commonly used, as it carries a low risk of adverse events. Salvage MS following previous MS is reserved for specific cases and is often surgically challenging. For radiosurgical failures, both salvage MS and repeat SRS may be used. Salvage MS following SRS also tends to be challenging, although excellent facial nerve outcomes are achievable. Furthermore, repeat SRS is an emerging concept and should be considered in small tumors that are growing but are asymptomatic. This chapter is aimed at reviewing an approach to failure of primary interventions for vestibular schwannomas, with an emphasis on the time interval between modalities, tumor control rates, functional outcomes, and complications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Upfront stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) could be an option for nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas (NFPA) unsuitable for surgery. Only small series evaluate the results of upfront SRS; the aim of the study was to report patient outcomes from a large, international patient cohort. METHODS:The study evaluated tumor control and complications after single-session SRS in a multicentric cohort of untreated NFPA. RESULTS:In total, 132 patients (median age 51.2 [IQR: 27.1] years at SRS, median volume 2.1 [IQR: 2.9] cm3) were included. The probability of tumor control was 100% (95% CI: 100-100), 98.1% (95% CI: 94.6-100), and 92.4 (95% CI: 81.6-100) at 3, 5, and 8 years after SRS. The cumulative probability of new pituitary deficit was 11.7% (95% CI: 3.8-18.9), 24.4% (95% CI: 12.1-35.1), and 29.5% (95% CI: 12.1-26.9) at 3, 5, and 8 years, respectively. No new visual field defect occurred. Before SRS, 50 patients (37.9%) presented with a visual field defect with a complete improvement in 17 (34.7%), partial improvement in 12 (24.5%), and stability in 19 (38.8%) at a last follow-up of 2.2 (3.9) years. One patient (2.0%) worsened after SRS. Before SRS, 10 patients (7.6%) presented with an oculomotor nerve palsy. One patient (0.8%) developed a new transient nerve palsy. At a last follow-up of 2.5 (4.4) years, 5 patients (45.4 35.7%) had a stability of their palsy, 1 had a partial improvement (9.1%), and 5 (45.4%) had a complete improvement. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Upfront SRS represents an option for appropriately selected patients with NFPA, and it exhibits a favorable efficacy and safety profile, but a longer follow-up is required. Visual improvement is low, and careful selection of patient is required.