Comparison of Sitting versus Nonsitting Position for the Resection of Brain Metastases in the Posterior Fossa in a Contemporary Cohort

Abstract

Background For surgery of brain metastases, good immediate postoperative functional outcome is of utmost importance. Improved functional status can enable further oncologic therapies and adverse events might delay them. Pros and cons of either sitting or prone positioning for resective surgery of the posterior fossa are debated, but contemporary data on direct postoperative outcome are rare. The aim of our study was to compare the functional outcome and adverse events of surgery for brain metastases in the sitting versus the nonsitting position in the direct postoperative setting.

Methods We retrospectively compared surgery of metastases located in the posterior fossa over a 3-year period in two level-A neurosurgical centers. Center 1 performed surgery exclusively in the sitting, while center 2 performed surgery only in the nonsitting position.

Results Worse functional outcome (Karnofsky performance scale) and functional deterioration were seen in the “sitting” group. We found significantly more “sitting” patients to deteriorate to a KPS score of ≤60%. In this study, treating patients with brain metastases in the sitting position resulted in a number needed to harm (NNH) of 2.3 and was associated with worse outcome and more adverse events.

Conclusion Therefore, we recommend the nonsitting position for surgery of brain metastases of the posterior fossa.

Keywords

sitting position - prone position - posterior fossa - neurosurgical technique

Ethics Approval

The study protocol was approved by the local institutional ethics committee (TUM: 459/21 S-KH), and the study was performed in accordance to the Declaration of Helsinki. For this retrospective observational study, no individual informed consent was necessary according to the ethics committee's guidelines and regulations.

Availability of Materials and Data

Data are available upon request.

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization was done by P.K., T.V., S.M., M.N.B., J.L., and E.S. The methodology was developed by P.K., T.V., S.M., and M.N.B. Formal analysis was done by P.K. and S.M. Data curation was done by T.V. and S.M. The original draft was prepared by P.K. and K.K. Review and editing were done by P.K., T.V., S.M., S.S., K.K., and E.S. Supervision was done by J.L. and E.S.. All the authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Publication History

Received: 31 January 2024

Accepted: 13 June 2024

Article published online:
20 August 2024

• References

• 1 Ersoy TF, Mokhtari N, Brainman D. et al. Surgical treatment of cerebellar metastases: survival benefits, complications and timing issues. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (21) 5263
• 2 Ganslandt O, Merkel A, Schmitt H. et al. The sitting position in neurosurgery: indications, complications and results. a single institution experience of 600 cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2013; 155 (10) 1887-1893
• 3 Roux A, Botella C, Still M. et al. Posterior fossa metastasis-associated obstructive hydrocephalus in adult patients: literature review and practical considerations from the neuro-oncology club of the French Society of Neurosurgery. World Neurosurg 2018; 117: 271-279
• 4 Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. J Clin Oncol 1984; 2 (03) 187-193
• 5 Sunderland GJ, Jenkinson MD, Zakaria R. Surgical management of posterior fossa metastases. J Neurooncol 2016; 130 (03) 535-542
• 6 Jadik S, Wissing H, Friedrich K, Beck J, Seifert V, Raabe A. A standardized protocol for the prevention of clinically relevant venous air embolism during neurosurgical interventions in the semisitting position. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (03) 533-538 , discussion 538–539
• 7 Mavarez-Martinez A, Israelyan LA, Soghomonyan S. et al. The effects of patient positioning on the outcome during posterior cranial fossa and pineal region surgery. Front Surg 2020; 7: 9
• 8 Standefer M, Bay JW, Trusso R. The sitting position in neurosurgery: a retrospective analysis of 488 cases. Neurosurgery 1984; 14 (06) 649-658
• 9 Himes BT, Mallory GW, Abcejo AS. et al. Contemporary analysis of the intraoperative and perioperative complications of neurosurgical procedures performed in the sitting position. J Neurosurg 2017; 127 (01) 182-188
• 10 Rath GP, Bithal PK, Chaturvedi A, Dash HH. Complications related to positioning in posterior fossa craniectomy. J Clin Neurosci 2007; 14 (06) 520-525
• 11 Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240 (02) 205-213
• 12 Mak PH, Campbell RC, Irwin MG. American Society of Anesthesiologists. The ASA physical status classification: inter-observer consistency. Anaesth Intensive Care 2002; 30 (05) 633-640
• 13 Chambless LB, Kistka HM, Parker SL, Hassam-Malani L, McGirt MJ, Thompson RC. The relative value of postoperative versus preoperative Karnofsky performance scale scores as a predictor of survival after surgical resection of glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurooncol 2015; 121 (02) 359-364
• 14 Fathi AR, Eshtehardi P, Meier B. Patent foramen ovale and neurosurgery in sitting position: a systematic review. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102 (05) 588-596