Skip to main content

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Oncol.
Sec. Neuro-Oncology and Neurosurgical Oncology
Volume 14 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1473261
This article is part of the Research Topic Integrating Health-Related Quality of Life in Neuro-Oncology View all 10 articles

Determinants of Quality of Life Following Resection of Skull Base Tumors: A Systematic Review

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria
  • 2 Department of Neurosurgery and Neurorestoration, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Skull base tumors represent a small subset of intracranial neoplasm. Due to their proximity to critical neurovascular structures, their resection often leads to morbidity. As a result, surgical interventions can exacerbate symptoms or cause new deficits, thereby impacting the patients' perceived quality of life (QoL). The factors influencing QoL in patients with skull base tumors remain underexplored. This systematic review aims to synthesize current research on QoL outcomes and identify potential factors influencing QoL in these patients.A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed using the keywords "Skull Base" AND "Quality of Life." A total of 815 studies published up to January 31, 2024, were screened. After abstract review, 656 studies were excluded, and 159 studies underwent full-text review. The wide variability in study methodologies and utilized QoL instruments made only a descriptive comparison possible.In total, 113 studies were systematically reviewed. Publications focusing on the same tumor type or localization were compared. The majority of studies addressed tumors of the anterior skull base, with pituitary adenomas, meningiomas and vestibular schwannomas being the most commonly represented. The impact of surgery on QoL is often underestimated by caregivers and has a more profound effect on patients than expected by surgeons. A transient decline in QoL after surgery was observed across almost all studies regardless of localization and entity. Factors influencing QoL included age, gender, tumor localization, surgical approach, tumor type, extent of resection, preoperative clinical status and neurological deficits. Radiotherapy and recurrent surgeries were predictors of poorer QoL. Early psychological intervention in complex tumors appears to enhance QoL. Some successful sealing techniques, such as nasoseptal flaps and lumbar drains, affected QoL. However, variability in study methodologies reduced the validity of the findings.This review highlights the significant impact of skull base tumor surgery on patients' QoL. Given the major oncological and surgical challenges presented by skull base tumors, their treatment significantly affects QoL, and gross total resection (GTR) should not always be the primary goal. Additionally, recognizing and addressing the modifiable and non-modifiable factors influencing QoL is crucial for improving patient outcomes and providing personalized care.

    Keywords: Quality of Life, Skull Base Surgery, Neurooncology, Systematic review, Patient-reported outcome measures

    Received: 30 Jul 2024; Accepted: 08 Oct 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Sperl, Rhomberg and Kretschmer. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Thomas Rhomberg, Department of Neurosurgery and Neurorestoration, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.