Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2024; 85(02): 145-155
DOI: 10.1055/a-2021-8852
Original Article

Simpson's Grading Scale for WHO Grade I Meningioma Resection in the Modern Neurosurgical Era: Are We Really Asking the Right Question?

Nicholas B. Dadario 
1   Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States
,
Michael E. Sughrue
2   Centre for Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery, Prince of Wales Private Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
3   Omniscient Neurotechnology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The Simpson grading scale for the classification of the extent of meningioma resection provided a tremendous movement forward in 1957 suggesting increasing the extent of resection improves recurrence rates. However, equal, if not greater, movements forward have been made in the neurosurgical community over the last half a century owing to improvements in neuroimaging capabilities, microsurgical techniques, and radiotherapeutic strategies. Sughrue et al proposed the idea that these advancements have altered what a “recurrence” and “subtotal resection” truly means in modern neurosurgery compared with Simpson's era, and that a mandated use of the Simpson Scale is likely less clinically relevant today. A subsequent period of debate ensued in the literature which sought to re-examine the clinical value of using the Simpson Scale in modern neurosurgery. While a large body of evidence has recently been provided, these data generally continue to support the clinical importance of gross tumor resection as well as the value of adjuvant radiation therapy and the importance of recently updated World Health Organization classifications. However, there remains a negligible interval benefit in performing overly aggressive surgery and heroic maneuvers to remove the last bit of tumor, dura, and/or bone just for the simple act of achieving a lower Simpson score. Ultimately, meningioma surgery may be better contextualized as a continuous set of weighted risk–benefit decisions throughout the entire operation.

Keywords

Simpson Scale - meningiomas - recurrence - neuroimaging - subtotal resection - neurosurgery - gross total resection

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization, M.E.S.; methodology, M.E.S and N.D.; formal analysis, N.D.; writing—original draft preparation, M.E.S and N.D.; writing—review and editing, M.E.S and N.D.; visualization, N.D.; supervision, M.E.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.




Publication History

Received: 05 October 2022

Accepted: 21 January 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
29 January 2023

Article published online:
22 February 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Sughrue ME, Kane AJ, Shangari G. et al. The relevance of Simpson Grade I and II resection in modern neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization Grade I meningiomas. J Neurosurg 2010; 113 (05) 1029-1035
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Simpson D. The recurrence of intracranial meningiomas after surgical treatment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1957; 20 (01) 22-39
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Otero-Rodriguez A, Tabernero MD, Munoz-Martin MC. et al. Re-evaluating Simpson Grade I, II, and III resections in neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization Grade I Meningiomas. World Neurosurg 2016; 96: 483-488
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Oya S, Kawai K, Nakatomi H, Saito N. Significance of Simpson grading system in modern meningioma surgery: integration of the grade with MIB-1 labeling index as a key to predict the recurrence of WHO Grade I meningiomas. J Neurosurg 2012; 117 (01) 121-128
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Hasseleid BF, Meling TR, Rønning P, Scheie D, Helseth E. Surgery for convexity meningioma: Simpson Grade I resection as the goal: clinical article. J Neurosurg 2012; 117 (06) 999-1006
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Gousias K, Schramm J, Simon M. The Simpson grading revisited: aggressive surgery and its place in modern meningioma management. J Neurosurg 2016; 125 (03) 551-560
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Heros RC. Editorial: Simpson grades. J Neurosurg 2012; 117 (06) 997-998 , discussion 998
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Cushing H, Eisenhardt L. Meningiomas: their classification, regional behaviour, life history, and surgical end results. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1938; 27 (02) 185
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Maiuri F, Mariniello G, Peca C. et al. Multicentric and diffuse recurrences of meningiomas. Br J Neurosurg 2020; 34 (04) 439-446
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Voß KM, Spille DC, Sauerland C. et al. The Simpson grading in meningioma surgery: does the tumor location influence the prognostic value?. J Neurooncol 2017; 133 (03) 641-651
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Brokinkel B, Spille DC, Brokinkel C. et al. The Simpson grading: defining the optimal threshold for gross total resection in meningioma surgery. Neurosurg Rev 2021; 44 (03) 1713-1720
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Fukushima Y, Oya S, Nakatomi H. et al. Effect of dural detachment on long-term tumor control for meningiomas treated using Simpson grade IV resection. J Neurosurg 2013; 119 (06) 1373-1379
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Lemée JM, Corniola MV, Da Broi M. et al. Extent of resection in meningioma: predictive factors and clinical implications. Sci Rep 2019; 9 (01) 5944
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Borovich B, Doron Y, Braun J. et al. Recurrence of intracranial meningiomas: the role played by regional multicentricity. Part 2: clinical and radiological aspects. J Neurosurg 1986; 65 (02) 168-171
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Slot KM, Verbaan D, Bosscher L, Sanchez E, Vandertop WP, Peerdeman SM. Agreement Between extent of meningioma resection based on surgical Simpson Grade and based on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging findings. World Neurosurg 2018; 111: e856-e862
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kinjo T, al-Mefty O, Kanaan I. Grade zero removal of supratentorial convexity meningiomas. Neurosurgery 1993; 33 (03) 394-399 , discussion 399
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Dadario NB, Brahimaj B, Yeung J, Sughrue ME. Reducing the cognitive footprint of brain tumor surgery. Front Neurol 2021; 12: 711646
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Dadario NB, Sughrue ME. Should neurosurgeons try to preserve non-traditional brain networks? A systematic review of the neuroscientific evidence. J Pers Med 2022; 12 (04) 587
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Dadario NB, Khatri D, Reichman N, Nwagwu CD, D'Amico RS. 5-Aminolevulinic acid-shedding light on where to focus. World Neurosurg 2021; 150: 9-16
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Dadario NB, Zaman A, Pandya M. et al. Endoscopic-assisted surgical approach for butterfly glioma surgery. J Neurooncol 2022; 156 (03) 635-644
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 DeMonte F, Smith HK, al-Mefty O. Outcome of aggressive removal of cavernous sinus meningiomas. J Neurosurg 1994; 81 (02) 245-251
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Sanai N, Sughrue ME, Shangari G, Chung K, Berger MS, McDermott MW. Risk profile associated with convexity meningioma resection in the modern neurosurgical era. J Neurosurg 2010; 112 (05) 913-919
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Nanda A, Bir SC, Maiti TK, Konar SK, Missios S, Guthikonda B. Relevance of Simpson grading system and recurrence-free survival after surgery for World Health Organization Grade I meningioma. J Neurosurg 2017; 126 (01) 201-211
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Schwartz TH, McDermott MW. The Simpson grade: abandon the scale but preserve the message. J Neurosurg 2020; Oct 09 (e-pub ahead of print).
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Rogers L, Barani I, Chamberlain M. et al. Meningiomas: knowledge base, treatment outcomes, and uncertainties. A RANO review. J Neurosurg 2015; 122 (01) 4-23
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Natarajan SK, Sekhar LN, Schessel D, Morita A. Petroclival meningiomas: multimodality treatment and outcomes at long-term follow-up. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (06) 965-979 , discussion 979–981
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Heald JB, Carroll TA, Mair RJ. Simpson grade: an opportunity to reassess the need for complete resection of meningiomas. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014; 156 (02) 383-388
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Gallagher MJ, Jenkinson MD, Brodbelt AR, Mills SJ, Chavredakis E. WHO grade 1 meningioma recurrence: are location and Simpson grade still relevant?. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2016; 141: 117-121
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 van Alkemade H, de Leau M, Dieleman EM. et al. Impaired survival and long-term neurological problems in benign meningioma. Neuro-oncol 2012; 14 (05) 658-666
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Behling F, Fodi C, Hoffmann E. et al. The role of Simpson grading in meningiomas after integration of the updated WHO classification and adjuvant radiotherapy. Neurosurg Rev 2021; 44 (04) 2329-2336
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Zentner J, Meyer B, Vieweg U, Herberhold C, Schramm J. Petroclival meningiomas: is radical resection always the best option?. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1997; 62 (04) 341-345
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Goldbrunner R, Minniti G, Preusser M. et al. EANO guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of meningiomas. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17 (09) e383-e391
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Kleihues P, Burger PC, Scheithauer BW. The new WHO classification of brain tumours. Brain Pathol 1993; 3 (03) 255-268
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD. et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 2007; 114 (02) 97-109
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G. et al. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016; 131 (06) 803-820
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Pearson BE, Markert JM, Fisher WS. et al. Hitting a moving target: evolution of a treatment paradigm for atypical meningiomas amid changing diagnostic criteria. Neurosurg Focus 2008; 24 (05) E3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Wilson TA, Huang L, Ramanathan D. et al. Review of atypical and anaplastic meningiomas: classification, molecular biology, and management. Front Oncol 2020; 10: 565582
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Rogers L, Gilbert M, Vogelbaum MA. Intracranial meningiomas of atypical (WHO grade II) histology. J Neurooncol 2010; 99 (03) 393-405
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Behling F, Hempel JM, Schittenhelm J. Brain invasion in meningioma-a prognostic potential worth exploring. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (13) 3259
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Huntoon K, Toland AMS, Dahiya S. Meningioma: a review of clinicopathological and molecular aspects. Front Oncol 2020; 10: 579599
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Al-Rashed M, Foshay K, Abedalthagafi M. Recent advances in meningioma immunogenetics. Front Oncol 2020; 9: 1472
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Goutagny S, Nault JC, Mallet M, Henin D, Rossi JZ, Kalamarides M. High incidence of activating TERT promoter mutations in meningiomas undergoing malignant progression. Brain Pathol 2014; 24 (02) 184-189
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Amrhein V, Greenland S, McShane B. Scientists rise up against statistical significance. Nature 2019; 567 (7748): 305-307
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Day SE, Halasz LM. Radiation therapy for WHO grade I meningioma. Chin Clin Oncol 2017; 6 (Suppl. 01) S4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Pollock BE, Stafford SL, Utter A, Giannini C, Schreiner SA. Stereotactic radiosurgery provides equivalent tumor control to Simpson Grade 1 resection for patients with small- to medium-size meningiomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 55 (04) 1000-1005
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Materi J, Mampre D, Ehresman J, Rincon-Torroella J, Chaichana KL. Predictors of recurrence and high growth rate of residual meningiomas after subtotal resection. J Neurosurg 2020; 134 (02) 410-416
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Ehresman JS, Garzon-Muvdi T, Rogers D. et al. The Relevance of Simpson Grade Resections in Modern Neurosurgical Treatment of World Health Organization Grade I, II, and III Meningiomas. World Neurosurg 2018; 109: e588-e593
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar