@article{DenglerMaldanerGlaeskeretal.2016,
  author    = {Dengler, Julius and Maldaner, Nicolai and Gl{\"a}sker, Sven and Endres, Matthias and Wagner, Martin and Malzahn, Uwe and Heuschmann, Peter U. and Vajkoczy, Peter},
  title     = {Outcome of Surgical or Endovascular Treatment of Giant Intracranial Aneurysms, with Emphasis on Age, Aneurysm Location, and Unruptured Aneuryms - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis},
  series = {Cerebrovascular Diseases},
  volume    = {41},
  journal   = {Cerebrovascular Diseases},
  number    = {3-4},
  organization    = {Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Study Group},
  issn      = {1015-9770},
  doi       = {10.1159/000443485},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196792},
  pages     = {187-198},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background: Designing treatment strategies for unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms (GIA) is difficult as evidence of large clinical trials is lacking. We examined the outcome following surgical or endovascular GIA treatment focusing on patient age, GIA location and unruptured GIA. Methods: Medline and Embase were searched for studies reporting on GIA treatment outcome published after January 2000. We calculated the proportion of good outcome (PGO) for all included GIA and for unruptured GIA by meta-analysis using a random effects model. Results: We included 54 studies containing 64 study populations with 1,269 GIA at a median follow-up time (FU-T) of 26.4 months (95\% CI 10.8-42.0). PGO was 80.9\% (77.4-84.4) in the analysis of all GIA compared to 81.2\% (75.3-86.1) in the separate analysis of unruptured GIA. For each year added to patient age, PGO decreased by 0.8\%, both for all GIA and unruptured GIA. For all GIA, surgical treatment resulted in a PGO of 80.3\% (95\% CI 76.0-84.6) compared to 84.2\% (78.5-89.8, p = 0.27) after endovascular treatment. In unruptured GIA, PGO was 79.7\% (95\% CI 71.5-87.8) after surgical treatment and 84.9\% (79.1-90.7, p = 0.54) after endovascular treatment. PGO was lower in high quality studies and in studies presenting aggregate instead of individual patient data. In unruptured GIA, the OR for good treatment outcome was 5.2 (95\% CI 2.0-13.0) at the internal carotid artery compared to 0.1 (0.1-0.3, p < 0.1) in the posterior circulation. Patient sex, FU-T and prevalence of ruptured GIA were not associated with PGO. Conclusions: We found that the chances of good outcome after surgical or endovascular GIA treatment mainly depend on patient age and aneurysm location rather than on the type of treatment conducted. Our analysis may inform future research on GIA.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FroehlichSassenrathNadjiOhletal.2022,
  author    = {Fr{\"o}hlich, Ellen and Sassenrath, Claudia and Nadji-Ohl, Minou and Unteroberd{\"o}rster, Meike and R{\"u}ckriegel, Stefan and Brelie, Christian von der and Roder, Constantin and Forster, Marie-Therese and Schommer, Stephan and L{\"o}hr, Mario and Pala, Andrej and Goebel, Simone and Mielke, Dorothee and Gerlach, R{\"u}diger and Renovanz, Mirjam and Wirtz, Christian Rainer and Onken, Julia and Czabanka, Marcus and Tatagiba, Marcos Soares and Rohde, Veit and Ernestus, Ralf-Ingo and Vajkoczy, Peter and Gansland, Oliver and Coburger, Jan},
  title     = {Resilience in lower grade glioma patients},
  series = {Cancers},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Cancers},
  number    = {21},
  issn      = {2072-6694},
  doi       = {10.3390/cancers14215410},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-297518},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Current data show that resilience is an important factor in cancer patients' well-being. We aim to explore the resilience of patients with lower grade glioma (LGG) and the potentially influencing factors. We performed a cross-sectional assessment of adult patients with LGG who were enrolled in the LoG-Glio registry. By phone interview, we administered the following measures: Resilience Scale (RS-13), distress thermometer, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test for visually impaired patients (MoCA-Blind), internalized stigmatization by brain tumor (ISBI), Eastern Cooperative Oncological Group performance status (ECOG), patients' perspective questionnaire (PPQ) and typical clinical parameters. We calculated correlations and multivariate regression models. Of 74 patients who were assessed, 38\% of those showed a low level of resilience. Our results revealed significant correlations of resilience with distress (p < 0.001, -0.49), MOCA (p = 0.003, 0.342), ECOG (p < 0.001, -0.602), stigmatization (p < 0.001, -0.558), pain (p < 0.001, -0.524), and occupation (p = 0.007, 0.329). In multivariate analyses, resilience was negatively associated with elevated ECOG (p = 0.020, β = -0.383) and stigmatization levels (p = 0.008, β = -0.350). Occupation showed a tendency towards a significant association with resilience (p = 0.088, β = -0.254). Overall, low resilience affected more than one third of our cohort. Low functional status is a specific risk factor for low resilience. The relevant influence of stigmatization on resilience is a novel finding for patients suffering from a glioma and should be routinely identified and targeted in clinical routine.},
  language  = {en}
}