Reporting standards for endovascular chemotherapy of head, neck and CNS tumors

摘要

Background: The goal of this article is to provide expert consensus recommendations for reporting standards, terminology and definitions when reporting on neurointerventional chemotherapy administration for head and neck tumors. These criteria may be used to design clinical trials, to provide definitions for patient stratification and to permit robust analysis of published data. Methods: This publication represents a consensus document by the Society for Neurointerventional Surgery. A PubMed search was conducted and included articles published in 2002-2011, with the search strategy designed to identify all studies of intra-arterial chemotherapy for tumors of neck and head. Articles were evaluated for evidence class, and recommendations were made using guidelines for evidence-based medicine proposed by a joint committee of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Specifically, technical methods, outcome variables and reported complications were highlighted. Results: Thirty-five publications were included in the review. While most studies represent class III evidence, there was sufficient concordance to justify level 2 recommendations regarding technical methods for administration of intra-arterial chemotherapy. The data also support level 2 recommendations regarding reporting of particular outcome variables subsumed within broad categories entitled 'Procedure-related', 'Disease control' and 'Survival'. The data support recommendations for the reporting of access site-related, neurologic, head and neck, ocular, hematologic and systemic complications, and also complications related to the percutaneous access site. Conclusions: Intra-arterial chemotherapy is a growing field in interventional neuroradiology. It is important to adopt uniform technical and reporting standards that will allow cross-publication comparisons and facilitate homogeneous practice standards. Published data support such standards, which are vital for the consistent evaluation of future published research.