Recurrent Glioblastoma Resection with Microvascular Free Flap Reconstruction and Associated GammaTile Implantation: A Personalized Approach with Oncologic and Reconstructive Integration

Abstract

Background

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), despite aggressive multimodal treatment comprising surgery followed by chemoradiation, is almost uniformly associated with inevitable recurrence and poor outcomes. In this clinical context, local radiation therapy—an emerging approach—has gained considerable attention over time for its potential to address the limitations of traditional treatment options for GBM. Multiple surgeries and adjuvant chemoradiation therapy can negatively impact the integrity of the scalp soft tissues and can compromise the ability to achieve primary closure over the surgical site. In these circumstances, complex reconstruction with free tissue transfer may be necessary.

Methods

We report the case of a 37-year-old female patient with recurrent GBM and associated wound healing complications who underwent single-stage GammaTile surgically targeted radiation therapy combined with microvascular free flap scalp reconstruction.

Results

Immediate free flap reconstruction over the site of GammaTile implantation did not result in any wound healing complications and did not compromise the viability of the transplanted tissue. This approach also provided immediate and localized radiation, possibly enhancing patient progression-free survival while reducing the likelihood of radiation-induced adverse effects.

Conclusion

We report the first case of GammaTile implantation with immediate reconstruction of the overlaying soft tissue defect with a free flap. Despite the immediate local radiation produced by the tiles abutting the deep surface of the free flap, there were no complications noted in the vascularity of the transplanted tissue. This finding provides preliminary evidence supporting the safety of using free tissue transfer alongside GammaTile implantation for complex reconstruction.

Keywords

Glioblastoma multiforme - GammaTile therapy - microvascular free flap - Multidisciplinary management - recurrent brain tumor - scalp reconstruction - brachytherapy - oncologic integration - tissue viability

Publication History

Received: 09 January 2025

Accepted: 19 March 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
08 April 2025

Article published online:
25 April 2025

• References

• 1 Gessler DJ, Ferreira C, Dusenbery K, Chen CC. GammaTile: surgically targeted radiation therapy for glioblastomas. Future Oncol 2020; 16 (30) 2445-2455
• 2 McClelland S, Gardner UG, Le Y, Ng SK, Shah MV, Watson GA. Safety and efficacy of GammaTile intracranial brachytherapy implanted during awake craniotomy. Brachytherapy 2021; 20 (06) 1265-1268
• 3 Ekhator C, Nwankwo I, Rak E, Homayoonfar A, Fonkem E, Rak R. GammaTile: comprehensive review of a novel radioactive intraoperative seed-loading device for the treatment of brain tumors. Cureus 2022; 14 (10) e29970
• 4 Garcia MA, Turner A, Brachman DG. The role of GammaTile in the treatment of brain tumors: a technical and clinical overview. J Neurooncol 2024; 166 (02) 203-212
• 5 Singh R, Lehrer EJ, Wang M. et al. Dose escalated radiation therapy for glioblastoma multiforme: an international systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 prospective trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111 (02) 371-384
• 6 Panchal JI, Agrawal RK, McLean NR, Dawes PJ. Early postoperative brachytherapy following free flap reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 1993; 46 (06) 511-515
• 7 Bartochowska A, Banaszewski J, Wierzbicka M. Is brachytherapy feasible after head and neck cancer reconstructive surgery? Preliminary report. Indian J Surg 2021; 83: 467-471
• 8 Ross DA, Hundal JS, Son YH. et al. Microsurgical free flap reconstruction outcomes in head and neck cancer patients after surgical extirpation and intraoperative brachytherapy. Laryngoscope 2004; 114 (07) 1170-1176
• 9 Geiger EJ, Basques BA, Chang CC. et al. Pedicle versus free flap reconstruction in patients receiving intraoperative brachytherapy. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2016; 50 (04) 227-232
• 10 Chang DW, Wang B, Robb GL. et al. Effect of obesity on flap and donor-site complications in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105 (05) 1640-1648
• 11 Valentini V, Cassoni A, Marianetti TM. et al. Diabetes as main risk factor in head and neck reconstructive surgery with free flaps. J Craniofac Surg 2008; 19 (04) 1080-1084
• 12 Serletti JM, Higgins JP, Moran S, Orlando GS. Factors affecting outcome in free-tissue transfer in the elderly. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 106 (01) 66-70
• 13 Miller RB, Reece G, Kroll SS. et al. Microvascular breast reconstruction in the diabetic patient. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119 (01) 38-45
• 14 Offodile II AC, Aherrera A, Guo L. Risk factors associated with prolonged postoperative stay following free tissue transfer: an analysis of 2425 patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (06) 1323-1332
• 15 Wong AK, Joanna Nguyen T, Peric M. et al. Analysis of risk factors associated with microvascular free flap failure using a multi-institutional database. Microsurgery 2015; 35 (01) 6-12
• 16 Perrot P, Bouffaut AL, Perret C, Connault J, Duteille F. Risk factors and therapeutic strategy after failure of free flap coverage for lower-limb defects. J Reconstr Microsurg 2011; 27 (03) 157-162
• 17 Bozikov K, Arnez ZM. Factors predicting free flap complications in head and neck reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59 (07) 737-742
• 18 Glicksman A, Ferder M, Casale P, Posner J, Kim R, Strauch B. 1457 years of microsurgical experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 100 (02) 355-363
• 19 Sanati-Mehrizy P, Massenburg BB, Rozehnal JM, Ingargiola MJ, Hernandez Rosa J, Taub PJ. Risk factors leading to free flap failure: analysis from the national surgical quality improvement program database. J Craniofac Surg 2016; 27 (08) 1956-1964
• 20 Yang HJ, Lee DH, Kim YW, Lee SG, Cheon YW. The trapezius muscle flap: a viable alternative for posterior scalp and neck reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg 2016; 43 (06) 529-535