Geographical Differences in Intracranial Meningioma Management: Examining 65,973 Patients across the United States
| Autor: | Jamie J. Van Gompel, Charles L. Anzalone, Matthew L. Carlson, Amy E. Glasgow, Brandon R. Grossard, Elizabeth B. Habermann |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Univariate analysis
education.field_of_study medicine.medical_specialty Referral business.industry Population Odds ratio medicine.disease Subspecialty Meningioma 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Epidemiology Medicine Neurology (clinical) business education Location 030217 neurology & neurosurgery Demography |
| Zdroj: | J Neurol Surg B Skull Base |
| ISSN: | 2193-634X 2193-6331 |
| DOI: | 10.1055/s-0038-1676376 |
| Popis: | Background Age, tumor size and location, overall health, and patient preference are primary considerations driving treatment decision-making for intracranial meningiomas. However, even for the same individual patient, treatment recommendations may vary between centers and providers. Objective To study associations between geography, disease presentation, and management of intracranial meningioma in the United States. Methods The population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results(SEER) data were queried between 2004 and 2014 for cases of intracranial meningioma. Results A total of 65,808 patients with intracranial meningioma were identified. Univariate analyses demonstrated strong associations between geographic location, age, and size of tumor at presentation. The mean age for all registries was 64.2 years, with a range from 62.0 (Utah registry) to 66.6 (Detroit registry). The greatest proportion of small tumors ( 4cm) were noted in the Hawaii registry (30.7% of tumors). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that the impact of geography on treatment selection was just as important as other established variables. For example, the distribution in tumor size between New Mexico and Greater California registries is nearly identical; however, the odds ratio for surgery was 1.5 times greater for the New Mexico population. Conclusion These data suggest that disease presentation and treatment are significantly influenced by regional referral patterns, provider or institutional treatment preferences, and regional availability of subspecialty expertise. Understanding such biases is important for patients, referring physicians, and treatment providers in an effort to provide balanced counseling and treatment. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|