INITIAL SURGICAL OUTCOMES OF LOW-GRADE GLIOMAS USING INTRAOPERATIVE ULTRASOUND: A CASE SERIES
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the initial outcomes of surgical resection of low-grade gliomas using intraoperative ultrasound guidance
Materials and Methods: A descriptive study combining retrospective and prospective data was conducted on 5 patients diagnosed with low-grade gliomas who underwent tumor resection with intraoperative ultrasound guidance at Saint Paul General Hospital from January 2021 to March 2026. Clinical characteristics, intraoperative ultrasound findings, extent of resection, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.
Results: The mean age: 36.4 ± 2.3 years, M/F: 3/2. Headache (100%). Tumors predominantly in the frontal lobe (60%). Intraoperative ultrasound successfully identified tumors in all cases (100%), with hyperechoic features in 80%. Maximal tumor resection was achieved in 100% of cases, including gross total resection in 20% and near-total resection in 80%, fully consistent with postoperative MRI findings. Histopathology revealed WHO grade 2 astrocytomas (60%) and oligodendrogliomas (40%). All patients showed clinical improvement or remained stable postoperatively, with no recorded complications. The mean Karnofsky score improved from 84 ± 5.5 to 92 ± 4.5.
Conclusion: Intraoperative ultrasound is an effective tool in low-grade glioma surgery, enabling accurate tumor localization, maximizing safe resection, and improving postoperative clinical outcomes.
Keywords
low-grade glioma, intraoperative ultrasound, brain tumor surgery
Article Details
References
2. Almairac F, Duffau H. Awake surgery with direct electrical stimulation mapping and real-time cognitive monitoring for functionally guided tumor resection: how we do it. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2025;167(1):239. doi:10.1007/s00701-025-06656-8
3. Wang M, Yu J, Zhang J, Pan Z, Chen J. Intraoperative ultrasound in recurrent gliomas surgery: Impact on residual tumor volume and patient outcomes. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1161496. doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1161496
4. Wu H, Cheng Y, Gao W, et al. Progress in the application of ultrasound in glioma surgery. Front Med. 2024;11. doi:10.3389/fmed.2024.1388728
5. Stieglitz LH. Wie zuverlässig ist Neuronavigation? Praxis. 2016;105(4):213-220. doi:10.1024/1661-8157/a002259
6. Trevisi G, Barbone P, Treglia G, Mattoli MV, Mangiola A. Reliability of intraoperative ultrasound in detecting tumor residual after brain diffuse glioma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Rev. 2020;43(5):1221-1233. doi:10.1007/s10143-019-01160-x
7. Šteňo A, Hollý V, Mendel P, et al. Navigated 3D-ultrasound versus conventional neuronavigation during awake resections of eloquent low-grade gliomas: a comparative study at a single institution. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018;160(2):331-342. doi:10.1007/s00701-017-3377-8
8. Zhang G, Li Z, Si D, Shen L. Diagnostic ability of intraoperative ultrasound for identifying tumor residual in glioma surgery operation. Oncotarget. 2017;8(42):73105-73114. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.20394