Preoperative versus postoperative single-fraction or fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for resected brain metastases: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University
Abstract
Background: The optimal timing and fractionation of perioperative stereotactic radiotherapy for resected brain metastases remain uncertain. We evaluated the comparative evidence for preoperative and postoperative stereotactic treatment and the validity of indirect comparisons.
Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, and ClinicalTrials.gov for comparative studies published or posted through 12 August 2026. Primary outcomes were local control or failure, leptomeningeal disease (LMD), and radiation necrosis (RN). Compatibility for quantitative synthesis was assessed by treatment definition, analysis unit, outcome definition, effect measure, and estimation method. Compatible patient-level hazard ratios (HRs) for local failure were combined in an exploratory fixed-effect network model. Incompatible evidence and patient-level and lesion-level estimates were synthesized separately. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were also assessed.
Results: Sixteen comparative studies were included, comprising six randomized trials and ten non-randomized studies. Three studies provided compatible patient-level HRs and formed a four-treatment local-failure network. Postoperative single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) reduced local failure compared with observation in one randomized trial (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24–0.88). Estimates for preoperative versus postoperative single-fraction SRS (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.38–6.49) and postoperative single-fraction SRS versus three- to five-fraction treatment (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.09–7.32) were imprecise. All indirect comparisons had wide confidence intervals that included 1. Each direct comparison was informed by one study, and the network contained no closed loop. Some indirect estimates were sensitive to the evidence selected for the single-fraction versus fractionated-treatment comparison. Evidence for LMD and RN did not form compatible connected networks and was synthesized descriptively. Certainty was moderate for postoperative single-fraction SRS versus observation and very low for the remaining local-failure comparisons.
Conclusions: Randomized evidence supports postoperative single-fraction SRS over observation for reducing local failure. However, current evidence does not establish a reliable hierarchy among preoperative SRS, postoperative single-fraction SRS, and postoperative fractionated treatment. Evidence for LMD and RN remains insufficient for network comparison. Treatment decisions should account for individual clinical characteristics until adequately powered prospective comparisons become available.
Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ , identifier CRD420261341468.
Related
- Stereotactic radiosurgery for isolated intracranial immunoglobulin G4 disease: An illustrative case.
- Stereotactic Radiosurgery for an Unresectable Jugulotympanic Paraganglioma: Clinical Response and Acute Toxicity in a 70-Year-Old Patient.
- Efficacy and safety of narlumosbart in combination with stereotactic body radiation therapy followed by first-line chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy in advanced driver gene-negative non-small cell lung cancer patients with bone metastases: a phase II, single-arm, single-centre clinical trial protocol
- Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Comparison of Proximal and Distal Isocenter Outcomes
- Multidisciplinary approach with stereotactic reirradiation to oligoprogressive spinal metastases from dedifferentiated osteosarcoma: a case report
BibTeX
@article{zhao2026preoperative,
title = {{Preoperative versus postoperative single-fraction or fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for resected brain metastases: a systematic review and network meta-analysis}},
author = {Tian Zhao and Shan Lu},
journal = {Frontiers in Oncology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fonc.2026.1848924},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.1848924/full},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Preoperative versus postoperative single-fraction or fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for resected brain metastases: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
AU - Tian Zhao
AU - Shan Lu
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/14
JO - Frontiers in Oncology
DO - 10.3389/fonc.2026.1848924
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.1848924/full
AB - Background: The optimal timing and fractionation of perioperative stereotactic radiotherapy for resected brain metastases remain uncertain. We evaluated the comparative evidence for preoperative and postoperative stereotactic treatment and the validity of indirect comparisons. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, and ClinicalTrials.gov for comparative studies published or posted through 12 August 2026. Primary outcomes were local control or failure, leptomeningeal disease (LMD), and radiation necrosis (RN). Compatibility for quantitative synthesis was assessed by treatment definition, analysis unit, outcome definition, effect measure, and estimation method. Compatible patient-level hazard ratios (HRs) for local failure were combined in an exploratory fixed-effect network model. Incompatible evidence and patient-level and lesion-level estimates were synthesized separately. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were also assessed. Results: Sixteen comparative studies were included, comprising six randomized trials and ten non-randomized studies. Three studies provided compatible patient-level HRs and formed a four-treatment local-failure network. Postoperative single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) reduced local failure compared with observation in one randomized trial (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24–0.88). Estimates for preoperative versus postoperative single-fraction SRS (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.38–6.49) and postoperative single-fraction SRS versus three- to five-fraction treatment (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.09–7.32) were imprecise. All indirect comparisons had wide confidence intervals that included 1. Each direct comparison was informed by one study, and the network contained no closed loop. Some indirect estimates were sensitive to the evidence selected for the single-fraction versus fractionated-treatment comparison. Evidence for LMD and RN did not form compatible connected networks and was synthesized descriptively. Certainty was moderate for postoperative single-fraction SRS versus observation and very low for the remaining local-failure comparisons. Conclusions: Randomized evidence supports postoperative single-fraction SRS over observation for reducing local failure. However, current evidence does not establish a reliable hierarchy among preoperative SRS, postoperative single-fraction SRS, and postoperative fractionated treatment. Evidence for LMD and RN remains insufficient for network comparison. Treatment decisions should account for individual clinical characteristics until adequately powered prospective comparisons become available. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ , identifier CRD420261341468.
SN - 2234-943X
ER -