Skip to content

Author

Wenchao Lu

1 paper indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Aug 2026

Metabolic boundary resection of glioblastoma correlates with clinical outcome and survival analysis: a comparative cohort study.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of 3D 1H-MR spectroscopy (MRS)-guided metabolic boundary resection (MBR) on the extent of resection (EOR), surgical safety, and prognosis in glioblastoma. METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed on clinical data from patients with IDH-wildtype glioblastoma who underwent resection at the authors' hospital. Patients were divided into two groups based on surgical methods: the traditional boundary resection (TBR) group (neuronavigation + contrast-enhancing [CE] boundary resection) and the MBR group (3D 1H-MRS combined with neuronavigation + MBR). Demographic, perioperative, and follow-up data were collected and compared between the two groups. Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used to evaluate the effects of various clinical and treatment-related factors on patient survival. RESULTS The MBR group included 41 patients (mean age 54.17 ± 12.04 years, 65.85% male) with a mean tumor volume of 58.07 ± 20.63 cm3. The TBR group included 30 patients (mean age 56.86 ± 9.78 years, 63.33% male) with a mean tumor volume of 52.51 ± 24.06 cm3. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in tumor laterality, location, volume, and length of hospital stay. In the TBR group, 10 patients achieved supra-total resection (SpTR), 13 achieved gross-total resection (GTR), and 7 achieved subtotal resection (STR). In the MBR group, 25 patients achieved SpTR, 10 achieved GTR, and 6 achieved STR. The rate of SpTR was significantly higher in the MBR group compared to the TBR group (p = 0.021). Postoperative neurological deficits occurred in 1 patient (2.4%) in the MBR group (transient) and 2 patients (6.7%) in the TBR group (1 permanent). No significant difference in complication rates was observed (p = 0.369). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank tests demonstrated that the MBR group had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to the TBR group (p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified EOR and surgical methods as independent prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS Three-dimensional 1H-MRS combined with a neuronavigation system is used to guide glioblastoma resection along the metabolic boundary during surgery, which can lead to a more complete resection of the glioblastoma and improve the PFS and OS of patients. Compared to CE boundary resection, MBR appears to be a stronger prognostic factor for survival.

Wenchao Lu, Yang Liu, Xiao Wu et al. · 0 citations