Hearing preservation and quality of life in small to medium sized vestibular schwannomas after a wait and scan approach or stereotactic radiosurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The management of vestibular schwannomas (VS) encompasses a choice between conservative “wait-and-scan” (WAS) approach, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or open microsurgical resection. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal management approach for small to medium sized VS. This study aims to compared outcomes related to hearing in patients with small and medium sized VS who underwent initial treatment with WAS versus SRS.

A systematic review of the available literature was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane up December 08, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model to calculate mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR). A leave-one-out analysis was conducted. The risk of bias was assessed via the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-Interventions (ROBINS-I) and Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool (RoB-2). Ultimately, the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE assessment. The primary outcomes were serviceable hearing, and pure-tone average (PTA). The secondary outcome was the Penn Acoustic Neuroma Quality of Life Scale (PANQOL) total score.

Nine studies were eligible for inclusion, comprising a total of 1,275 patients. Among these, 674 (52.86%) underwent WAS, while 601 patients (47.14%) received SRS. Follow-up duration ranged from two to eight years. The meta-analysis indicated that WAS had a better outcome for serviceable hearing (0.47; 95% CI: 0.32 – 0.68; p < 0.001), as well as for postoperative functional measures including PTA score (MD 13.48; 95% CI 3.83 – 23.13; p < 0.01), and PANQOL total score (MD 3.83; 95% CI 0.42 – 7.25; p = 0.03). The overall certainty of evidence ranged from “very low” to “moderate”.

Treating small to medium sized VS with WAS increases the likelihood of preserving serviceable hearing and optimized PANQOL overall postoperative score compared to SRS. Nevertheless, the limited availability of literature and the methodological weakness observed in existing studies outline the need for higher-quality studies.