Commentary: Post-Acute Cognitive Rehabilitation for Adult Brain Tumor Patients.
G. Christofi,Viktoria Sefcikova,George Samandouras
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyab064
IF: 5.315
2021-03-24
Neurosurgery
Abstract:C © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com W ith increasing evidence of improved overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) associated with greater extent of resection (EOR) of gliomas, more patients undergo complete or supracomplete resections, resulting in often-transient language and wider cognitive deficits requiring rehabilitation.1-3 These deficits can be superimposed to pre-existing, prevalent neurocognitive deficits affecting patients harboring gliomas. Important questions remain whether cognitive rehabilitation, either acute or post-acute, can help patients improve/repair impaired cognitive domains and which domains are most likely to improve following rehabilitation efforts. This is a challenging question particularly because most studies report on stroke and spinal cord injury patient cohorts. Weyer-Jamora and colleagues4 are to be commended on reporting the importance of post-acute cognitive rehabilitation and providing a set of guidelines for adult brain tumor patients. The brain tumor, stroke, and traumatic brain injury literature review expands on the following topics: (i) the amenability of specific cognitive domains to rehabilitation-related improvement, (ii) the optimal time period for effective cognitive rehabilitation, and (iii) confounding factors to be considered at baseline and postintervention evaluations. Presently, studies on cognitive rehabilitation of brain tumor patients remain infrequent because of high tumor recurrence rates and low OS rates, especially for malignant brain tumors.5,6 The beneficial effect of rehabilitative therapy has been well-established and validated in stroke patients, allowing this cohort to serve as a standard of comparison, assuming that the effects of rehabilitation are similar to brain tumor cohorts.7 Evidence for the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation in various forms of acquired brain injury patients is presented in Table.8-16 Metaanalyses of randomized control trials (RCTs) indicate significant effects using standardized mean difference (SMD) of cognitive rehabilitation for the following domains: verbal (SMD 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.030.94)10 and visual working memory (SMD 0.54, CI 0.19-0.90),10 functional communication (SMD 0.28, CI 0.06-0.49, 10 RCTs),11 reading comprehension (SMD 0.29, CI 0.030.55, 8 RCTs),11 writing (SMD 0.41, CI 0.140.67, 8 RCTs),11 and spatial neglect (SMD 0.35, CI 0.09-0.62).15 General memory improvements have only been captured with subjective measures in the short term (SMD 0.36, CI 0.080.64),14 but not objective assessments.10,14 It has been reported that executive functioning,10 attention,10,16 and processing speed10 do not present with significant benefits or benefits are only presented in studies with low-quality evidence rankings.16 Presently, 2 RCTs focus on brain tumor patients for whom significant benefits have been reported for both verbal memory and attention.8,9 The time course of rehabilitation in the context of brain tumor patients can be divided into (i) acute, inpatient and (ii) post-acute, usually but not exclusively, in outpatient settings. RCTs show significant effects during both time periods for verbal memory and attention measures in brain tumor patients, with Zucchella and colleagues8 beginning therapy within 2 wk of surgery and Gehring and colleagues9 after 6 mo. However, lack of followup renders comparison of the long-term benefits of each approach challenging, specifically in determining the optimal time course, balancing gains, and minimizing adverse therapy effects. The stroke literature, including a different injury mechanism, suggests more intensive therapy shortly after injury may not be necessary. For example, a large multi-center RCT found more intensive aphasia rehabilitation, beginning <15 d poststroke in 98% patients (mean of 22.7 h over a median of 32 d), did not confer a statistical benefit on communication recovery compared to usual care (beginning <15 d in 79% patients; mean of 9.5 h across a median of 28 d).11 The neuro-oncology practice model presented by Weyer-Jamora and colleagues4 offers a balanced view that leaves room for possible future studies examining interactions of timing and dose of cognitive neurorehabilitation.
Medicine