Comparison of Survival Outcomes Between Partial Resection and Biopsy for Primary Glioblastoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Objectives Gross total resection for glioblastoma (GBM) has been associated with better prognosis. However, it is not always feasible, and the threshold for the extent of resection required for better prognosis has been controversial. Therefore, we compared the survival and clinical outcomes of patients with GBM who had undergone partial resection (PR) or biopsy. Methods Of the 110 patients, 32 and 78, who had undergone PR and biopsy, respectively, were enrolled to identify any differences in clinical outcomes. No differences were found in patient demographics between the 2 groups, except for tumor location and mean tumor volume ( P  = 0.02 and P Results The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ significantly between the PR and biopsy groups ( P  = 0.84 and P  = 0.48, respectively). After propensity score matching, the differences in OS and PFS between the 2 groups were still not statistically significant ( P  = 0.51 and P  = 0.75, respectively). The hazard ratios for OS and PFS for the PR group compared with biopsy were 0.98 and 0.73, respectively; however, the difference was not statistically significant ( P  = 0.96 and P  = 0.39, respectively). The surgical complication rate was greater in the PR group (14 of 32; 43.7%) than in the biopsy group (9 of 78; 11.5%; P Conclusions PR failed to improve survival compared with biopsy for patients with GBM. Moreover, the surgical complication rate in the PR group was greater than that in the biopsy group.