AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Raef F.A. Hafez, M.D. Prof. of Neurosurgery and Gamma knife Radiosurgery-International Medical Center / IMC, Cairo- Egypt.
Citation: Raef F.A. Hafez, Magad S. Morgan, Esam Abed El Kawy, Osama M. Fahmy, Wael K. Zakaria, et all (2023), Gamma Knife Radiosurgery as a Dependable, Effective Option for Glomus Jagulare Tumors: A Single Institution Long-Term Experience and Review of the Literature, J Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. 13(2); DOI:10.31579/2578-8868/258
Copyright: © 2023, Raef F.A. Hafez. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of The Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Received: 30 January 2023 | Accepted: 17 February 2023 | Published: 27 February 2023
Keywords: gamma knife radiosurgery; glomus jugulare tumor; jugular paraganglioma; lower cranial nerves; stereotactic radiosurgery
Objective: Glomus jugulare tumors (GJTs) are benign, slowly growing tumors, highly vascular, with the potential to infiltrate neurovascular structures. Surgical treatment is usually associated with high morbidity and even death. Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) has been established as an effective treatment option. This retrospective study aims to report and confirm GKRS.'s long-term effectiveness and safety for GJT patients. Methods: A total of 65 patients with GJTs were treated with GKRS, at the authors' center from 2005 to 2020, with a mean follow-up period of 87.7 months. The mean treated GJT volume was 5.4cc with a median prescription dose of 15Gy and a median maximum dose of 42.9Gy. Results: Most patients were females (77%), and the median age at presentation was 48 years. The overall tumor growth control was 93.8% (61 patients) 39% of them achieved tumor size reduction. The overall clinical control was 90.8% (59 patients), and 40.7% achieved clinical improvement. The Actuarial tumor rate free of progression was 100% at 3 years, 91.5% at 5 years, and 86% at 10 years of follow-up. Conclusions: GKRS for GJTs typically results in high long-term tumor control and lower neurological morbidity than those associated with microsurgical resection, therefore should be consider as a dependable effective treatment option.
CNs=Caranial nerves, GKRS=Gamma Knife Radiosurgery, GJTs=Glomus Jagulare Tumors, cc=Cubic Centimeter, SRS=Stereotactic Radiosurgery
Glomus jugulare tumors (GJTs) are rare benign skull base tumors that arise from paraganglia adventitia on the superior surface of the jugular bulb within the jugular foramen. They typically exhibit indolent growth within the temporal bone with the potential to infiltrate the facial and lower cranial nerves (CNs), petrous bone, carotid canal and artery, and posterior fossa. GJTs represent 0.03% of all neoplasms and 0.6% of all head and neck tumors; they occur predominantly in women in a ratio of 1:1,000,000 in the fifth and sixth decade of life. [1, 2, 3, 4. 5 ]. GJTs may extend intra-cranially, compressing the brain stem, and extra-cranially into the cervical region. [1,3, 6] Early symptoms may be as subtle as pulsatile tinnitus or conductive hearing loss. With progressive tumor growth, dysphagia, dysphonia, and tongue weakness may develop as manifestations of lower CNs involvement. Additionally, patients may develop headaches, ataxia, or vomiting from elevated intracranial pressure from venous sinus thrombosis or, rarely, obstructive hydrocephalus. Ataxia and brainstem symptoms infrequently develop with larger tumors with intracranial extension [1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]. As many as 10% of GJTs may be familial, inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern with paternal genomic imprinting. [1, 11, 12, 13 ]
Fractionated external beam radiotherapy, or Radiosurgery. Traditionally, managing these tumors involved microsurgical resection that may proceed by preoperative embolization. Various procedures may result in planned staging or be used with a salvage treatment after recurrence or progression [7, 11]. All GJTs are highly vascular and develop within proximity to the pars nervosa of the jugular foramen, rendering gross-total resection (GTR) challenging with a relatively high risk of lower cranial nerve injury. [1, 3] Thus, it is not surprising that resection entails a great deal of morbidity and often leaves behind large residual tumors and even may cause mortality [1, 4, 7, 14, 15, 16 ].
Gamma knife surgery (GKRS) has been used successfully to treat GJTs and is considered a less invasive procedure that provides a better chance of cranial nerve protection and tumor control. GKRS allows the delivery of a single, biologically high-dose radiation treatment with extreme conformity (sharp dose gradient at the tumor edge). [1, 3, 6, 7, 17, 18] Several published series of GJTs treated with GKRS have reported excellent tumor control outcomes for both primary [1, 3, 8, 10, 15, 20, 21, 22] and recurrent tumors with preservation of lower CNs function. [8, 10, 12, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25]
Objective: This retrospective cohort study aims to review, analyze and report the effectiveness and safety of GKRS in treating GJTs patients treated in our center through describing a single-center long-term experience of more than 15 years.
Patient population: Clinical and radiological data were reviewed for 65 GJT patients treated with GKRS between January 2005 and December 2020 at our center with a mean follow-up period was 87.7 months, and a median was 84 months (range 18 -192 months). The study included 50 females, and 15 males, the median age at presentation was 48 years (range 22–72 years). Five patients were excluded from the study as four did not complete the follow-up criteria, and one died four years post-GKRS because of diabetes mellitus complications. GJTs Patients were deemed eligible for GKRS if the tumor is typically located at the jagulare bulb, contrast enhancement in T1, and fat suppression MRI imaging, less than 4cm in maximum diameters and above the upper border of the second cervical vertebra. Tumors were located on the left side in 36 and the right side in 29 patients. Prior to GKRS, all patients underwent a complete neurological assessment, audiogram, and MRI with contrast examination. The patient's neurological status prior to treatment was used as a reference point. Radiographic studies, including MRI of the brain with different sequences (T1, T2, fat suppression, and T1 with Contrast) and Computed tomography, are infrequently requested.
GKRS was the primary treatment modality in 52 patients (80%), defined tumors by characteristic radiographic neuroimaging, patient history, and neurological examination. GKRS also was used as adjuvant treatment in 13 patients (20%) for residual or recurrent tumors after surgery with pathologic tissue confirmation in 12 patients (4 of them underwent pre-microsurgery embolization). One patient had GKRS for tumor recurrence after fractionated radiotherapy. Table 1
| Patients characteristics | Numbers of GJTs patients |
| Total number of patients | 65 |
Age (years) Median |
48 |
Sex Female Male |
50 15 |
Presenting symptoms Pulsatile tinnitus Decrease hearing Hearing loss Facial paraesthesia Facial nerve palsy Bulbar symptoms Unsteadiness Ataxia Neck and/or shoulder pain |
50 46 10 6 8 34 6 5 8 |
Lower cranial nerve palsies -IX-X cranial nerve XI XII cranial nerve |
34 8 6 |
Previous treatment None Microsurgery Fractionated radiotherapy |
52 12 1 |
Table I: Summary of 65 GLJTs patients’ characteristics treated with GKRS
Management and gamma knife procedure: All patients were treated using Elekta-Leksell Gamma Knife (models B, and 4-C, depending on the year of treatment); recently, we have used the Icon GKRS model. All cases are treated in a single GKRS session with a frame-based application. The standard Leksell G- stereotactic head frame is applied after local anesthesia application. Frame placement should be shifted toward the tumor side, caudally as much as possible, with the head in flexion position, ensuring easy access to the gamma knife radiation to the whole lesion, avoiding collisions. Target localization was obtained using high-resolution MRI (1.5 Tesla and sometimes the 3 Tesla), obtaining T1, T2, fat suppression sequences, and T1 with contrast at 1.2mm slice thickness on zero angles without a gap. T1-fat suppression and T2 axial sequence were obtained to eliminate tumor edema, bone, and fat. Gamma knife Plans consisted of a mixture of shots depending on tumor volume and the radiation conformity needed. The median tumor volume was 5.4cc (range 1–19.3 cc), the median tumor peripheral prescription dose was 15Gy (12Gy–16Gy), and the median isodose line was 38% (range 35%–60%). The median maximum dose was 42.9Gy (range 31.6Gy–45.7Gy), and the median Lomax conformity index CI Lomax was 0.98 (range 0.89-1). [26] The adjacent area of the brain stem maximum radiation dose was 10Gy or less. Both semicircular apparatus and cochlea received less than 5Gy. Table 2
Treatment was technically feasible for all cases, even for those with low-lying tumors but above the upper border of C2 due to the Low frame placement with the head in flexion as much as possible and using the Open MRI indicator box for MRI neuroimaging.
| Feature | Median (range) |
| Initial tumor volume in a cubic centimeter (*cc) | 5.4 (range 1–19.3) |
| Peripheral prescription dose (PPD) in Gy | 15 (range 12–16) |
| Prescription isodose line in % | 38 (range 35–60), |
| Maximal dose in Gy | 42.9 (range 31.6–45.7) |
*cc; Cubic centimeter
Table 2: Summary of GKRS treatment parameters for the treated 65 patients with GJTs.
Follow-up
Consisted of surveillance, neurological evaluation, and MRI imaging, usually performed six months post-GKRS and then annually for five years, then every two years afterward, or if there were new or worsening symptoms. The mean clinical and radiological follow-up time was 87.7 months (range 18-192 months). The standard GKRS response classification was used to assess treatment outcomes in follow-up, including tumor size control (size unchanged controlled, reduced and regress >10%. or progress) and clinically (unchanged, improved or worsened and additional deficit). MRI sequences of T1, T2, fat suppression, and T1 with Contrast post-GKRS were routinely acquired, and tumor maximum diameters were estimated on 2-D plan MRI images.
Statistics: Continuous features with means, medians, and ranges categorical features were summarized with frequency events and percentages using Excel essential Spreadsheet software. Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc statistical software package version (20.116). Survival free of radiographic and clinical progression was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The effect of several variables (age, tumor volume, peripheral prescription dose, Lomax conformity index, and pre-GKRS severity of the bulbar symptoms and signs) was evaluated using Cox- proportional hazards regression method.
Literature Search: A systematic literature search on PubMed and Science Direct was performed. The following query terms: "gamma knife" [All Fields] or "stereotactic gamma knife radiosurgery" [All Fields] and "glomus jagulare" [All Fields] or " paraganglioma " [All Fields] and "treatment of GJTs" or "management of GJTs" [All Fields]). There was no time constraint placed on the publication of studies, but studies were limited to those in the English language. We excluded patients with glomus tympanicum and secretory paraganglioma tumors and those treated using Cyber. K and LINAC. Articles included in the study contained patients who had undergone GKRS treatment of glomus jagulare tumor. Articles were excluded if we could not access the complete text, and Case reports were excluded. Crosschecking of the references for relevant articles was performed.
The most common neurological symptoms and deficit at initial evaluation at presentation were pulsatile tinnitus reported in 50 patients. Deterioration of hearing in 46 patients (conductive affection in 42 and sensorineural hearing Loss in 4), and complete hearing loss in 10 patients. Bulbar symptoms, including regurgitation, dysphagia, and dysphonia (IX-X cranial nerves), were detected in 34 patients. Facial nerve palsy was reported in 8 patients (6 of them had post-operative facial nerve palsy and were treated for recurrence and residuals). Tongue deviation and wasting (XII paresis) were noted in 6 patients, shoulder and neck pain in 8 patients, and trigeminal nerve affection was observed in 6 patients. Of the 34 patients who presented with bulbar symptoms, 10 had distressing symptoms, and 24 had mild to moderate symptoms. Most patients had more than one cranial nerve deficit.
Tumor control outcome: The Overall tumor size control rate in this study was 93.8.% (61 patients), 39% (24 patients) showed tumor reduction, and (61%) 37 patients showed unchanged or stable tumor size. Four patients (6.2%) developed tumor progression established in the last MRI images at 62, 68, 84, and 96 months; all clinically worsened or had a new neurological deficit. One patient was re-treated with GKRS after tumor regrowth, another had further fractionated radiotherapy, and the other two did not receive any further surgical or radiation treatment. Tumor progressions post-GKRS in our series were confirmed after five years of follow-up.
In Cox- proportional hazards regression method of different variables (age, tumor volume, peripheral prescription dose, Lomax conformity index CI Lomax), none were significantly correlated with tumor progression-free survival.
The Kaplan-Meier actuarial tumor control rate reported post-GKRS and free of progression was 100% at 3 years, 91.5% at 5 years, and 86% at 10 years of follow-up time. Figure 1.
Figure 1: Survival free of radiographic tumor progression using the Kaplan-Meier method.
Clinical outcome: The overall clinical control at the last clinical evaluation was reported in 59 patients (90.8%), with evident improvement in 24 patients (40.7%) and unchanged or clinically stable in 35 patients (59.3%). Although all patients reported improvement of their previous tinnitus, significant improvement was reported in 24/50 patients (49%), and different degrees of bulbar symptom improvement was reported in 18/34 patients (53%). Hearing improvement was noted in 12 patients.
In Cox- proportional hazards regression method with univariate analysis, the severity of distressing bulbar symptoms and signs (IX and X) pre-GKRS were significant predictor factors for the clinical outcome (P=<.0.0194).
In our study, no patient died of side effects related to GKRS, and no adverse radiation reaction was observed.
Complications: New cranial nerve deficits or progression of preexisting symptoms post-GKRS were seen in 6 patients(9.2%). In four of them, there was associated tumor size progression. Clinical progression included a progressive decrease in hearing observed in 4 patients, partial facial nerve palsy in one, progression of bulbar symptoms in 4, and additional trigeminal affection in 2 patients. Severe distressing bulbar symptoms and signs upon presentation were detected in all those six patients. Clinical worsening or additional cranial nerve deficit was reported at a period ranging between 44-108 months post-treatment.
Glomus jugulare tumors pose a complex therapeutic challenge because of their location, the usual lower cranial nerve involvement, and the highly vascular nature. Several management options have been described, including surgical removal, endovascular embolization, radiotherapy, and Radiosurgery. The proximity of GJTs to lower cranial nerves, from V through XII, and the hypervascularity elevate the risk of post-operative cranial nerve deficits and propensity for intra-operative bleeding. [7,8,11,16,27,28,29,30] Jackson et al. 2001; in a study of 176 patients with glomus tumors that underwent lateral skull base resections, reported post-operative new Cranial nerve deficit in IX, X, XI, and XII in 39%, 25%, 26%, and 21% of cases, respectively [27]. Ivan and colleagues 2011; conducted a meta-analysis study over 869 GJT patients comparing the morbidity of microsurgery alone, microsurgery with SRS, and SRS alone. The authors reported that patients undergoing SRS alone experienced the lowest rates of recurrence and complications. [29]
The largest multicenter series of the North American Gamma Knife Consortium was reported by Sheehan et al., 2012 [24]. The author observed 132 patients for a median of 50.5 months and found an overall tumor control achieved in 93% of patients; the actuarial tumor control rate was 88% at 5 years post-GKRS, and pulsatile tinnitus improved in 49% of patients. New cranial nerve deficits were noted in 15%. Patel et al., 2019 [1], in a large series of 60 GJT patients treated with GKRS with a mean follow-up of 60 months, reported an overall tumor control rate of 92% and a new cranial nerve deficit of 5%.
In reviewing the literature, we extracted 19 studies that have reported the parameters and outcomes of GKRS treatment for glomus jagulare tumors (GJTs), as shown in Table 3, summarizing the data and outcome of these series. [1, 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 24, 31-38]
| Author, Year | Treatment Modality | Mean Age (Years) | Number of Patients
| Mean Follow-up (months) | Median Tumor Volume*cc | Median Marginal Dose (Gy) | Median Maximal Dose (Gy) | Tumor Control Rate (%) | Clinical Control Rate (%) |
| Jordan et al., 2000 [22] | *GKRS | 61.9 | 8 | 27 | 9.81 | NR | 33 | 100 | 100 |
| Saringer et al, 2001 [40] | GKRS | 63.5 | 13 | 50.4 | 9 | NR | NR | 100 | 84.6 |
| Eustacchio et al, 2002 [7] | GKRS | NR | 19 | 86.4 | 5.22 | 14 | NR | 95 | 94.7 |
| Bitaraf et al, 2006 [2] | GKRS | 46.5 | 14 | 18.5 | 9.8 | 18 | *NR | 100 | NR |
| Feigl and Horstmann, 2006 [9] | GKRS | 51.7 | 12 | 33 | 9.4 | 17 | NR | 100 | 100 |
| Gerosa et al, 2006 [13] | GKRS | 56 | 20 | 50.85 | 7.03 | 17.5 | NR | 100 | 90 |
| Sharma et al, 2008 [35] | GKRS | 46.6 | 10 | 25.4 | 7.9 | 16.3 | NR | 100 | 100 |
| Ganz and Abdelkarim, 2009 [16] | GKRS | NR | 14 | 28 | 14.2 | NR | NR | 100 | 100 |
| Miller et al, 2009 [28] | GKRS | 69.6 | 5 | 34 | 4.14 | 15 | NR | 100 | 100 |
| Genç et al, 2010 [12] | GKRS | 50 | 18 | 41.5 | 5.54 | 15 | NR | 94 | 94.4 |
| Chen et al, 2010 [3] | GKRS | 60.1 | 15 | 43.2 | 7.2 | NR | NR | 80 | 80 |
| Navarro Martín et al, 2010 [29] | GKRS | 56 | 10 | 9.7 | 4.77 | NR | 29.6 | 100 | 100 |
| Sheehan et al., 2012 [39] | GKRS | 58.7 | 132 | 50.5 | 50.5 | 15 | 30 | 92.7 | 85 |
| Gandía González ML et al, 2014 [11] | GKRS | 52.4 | 58 | 76.6 | 9.3 | 13.6 | 25.2 | 94.8 | 91.4 |
| Wakefield et al., 2017 [42] | GKRS | 64 | 17 | 123 | 9.8 | 15 | NR | 94 | 94 |
| Ibrahim et al., 2017 [19] | GKRS | 55 | 76 | 51.5 | 7 | 18 | 36.7 | 93 | 78.7 |
| Sharma et al, 2018 [36] | GKRS | 61 | 38 | 62.3 | 5 | 15 | 28 | 84 | 81 |
| Patel et al, 2019 [32] | GKRS | 54.5 | 60 | 66 | 11.6 | 16 | 32 | 92 | 95 |
| Hellinger RL 2021 [18] | GKRS | 60 | 29 | 37.3 | 13.9 | 12.8 | 24 | 96.6 | 96 |
| Current study | GKRS | 48 | 65
| 87.7 | 5.4 | 15 | 42.9 | 93.8 | 90.8 |
*GKRS= Gamma Knife radiosurgery, *NR= not reported; *cc=Cubic centimeter
Table 3: Summary of existing literature series of GKRS treatment for Glomus Jugulare Tumors
Tumor growth control outcome: The overall tumor control rate we obtained was 93.8%. Twenty-four patients achieved tumor size reduction, and 37 had unchanged or stable tumor size. The actuarial tumor size control rates post- GKRS reported were 100% at 3 years, 91.5% at 5 years, and 86% at 10 years.
Our results are comparable to those in the large North American series. The dosimetric parameters reported in Sheehan et al. [24] and Patel et al. [1] series, including tumor volume and radiation doses, are nearly similar to the parameters of our series. Post -GKRS, we did not find a significant correlation between tumor size changes and tumor contrast enhancement, even in the long term. Figure 2
Figure 2: Serial (A) Axial and (B) Coronal contrast MRI brain images for left side 7cc glomus jagulare tumor volume in 44 years old female patient treated with GKRS in 2006 with 15Gy to 35% isodose line. Follow-up images in 2012, 2014, and 2022 showed a gradual decrease in treated tumor size starting in 2014 and became more evident in June 2022.
In the current study, patients who developed tumor size progression post-GKRS (4 pats-6.2%) were reported after the fifth year of follow-up at 62, 68, 84, and 96 months respectively. These findings emphasized the necessity of longer-term follow for such tumors. Series that reported a lower incidence of GJTs tumor progression after GKRS either reported shorter follow-up or was conducted on fewer cases. [6, 17, 31, 34, 35, 36 ] On the other hand, our results are following series reported with more extended follow-up periods that were conducted for a large number of GJT patients. [1, 11, 24, 32, 33, 39 ]
Clinical outcomes: The overall clinical control at the last clinical evaluation was reported in 59 patients (90.8%), with evident improvement in 24 (40.7%) and unchanged or clinically stable in 35 patients (59.3%). New cranial nerve deficits or worsened pre-treatment deficits were noted in 6 patients (9.2%). The Four patients who developed worsened neurological status or cranial nerve deficits developed in addition to associated tumor size progression confirmed at the fifth year of follow-up. Pulsatile tinnitus significantly improved in 24/50 patients (49%), and bulbar symptoms improved in 18/34 patients (53%). Hearing improvement was observed in 12 patients.
These clinical results corroborated with the findings in many series. [1, 4, 7, 5, 11, 24, 25, 32, 36] The maximum is given dose to the cochlea and the semicircular apparatus in our series was=< less>
Ganz et al. [35] reported that clinical improvement was noted 6.5 months after treatment, even though a decrease in imaging was not observed until 13.5 months. Chen et al. [12], in their study of 14 GJT patients treated with GKRS, reported that Clinical and radiologic improvements only sometimes correlated. On the contrary, in the current series, 4 of the six patients with worsening symptoms post-GKRS had radiologically confirmed tumor regrowth. On the other hand, all patients who had tumor size reduction had different degrees of clinical improvement, supporting the relationship between tumor size control and clinical outcomes. These findings support the hypothesis described by many authors that the development of new or worsening cranial nerve deficits could be a predictor sign of tumor growth. [1, 2, 7,11, 25, 36, 37]
Wakefield DV et al. [2], and Dobberpuhl et al. [3], emphasized that Single modality Gamma Knife surgery treatment of glomus jugulare tumors appears safe and efficacious. These findings support our results, where the overall tumor control rate was 98% in 52 patients who received GKRS as primary treatment.
Dharnipragada R. et al. [42], in a meta-analysis, identified 19 studies with a total of 852 GJT patients, 153 patients underwent Radiosurgery, and 699 underwent surgery. The author reported a 3.5% tumor growth rate following Radiosurgery and a 3.9% recurrence rate in surgical resection. The complication rate for Radiosurgery was 7.6% differing significantly from surgical complication rates of 29.6%. These data suggested that Radiosurgery was a reasonable management option for patients with minimal symptoms at high risk for surgery. Furthermore, microsurgical resection should be reserved for patients with lower cranial neuropathies or those who have failed radiation treatment.
The current study, following most of the published series [1, 2, 3, 11, 24, 32, 33, 40, 41, 42] that were conducted on a large number of GJT patients treated with GKRS with long-term follow-up, strengthened the high effectiveness and safety of GKRS in the management of GJTs patients.
Strengthens and limitations: The relative homogeneity of the studied 40 GJTs studied patients strengthens the study in the face of the somehow limited study size of these rare tumors. The mean follow-up period was 87.7 months. This retrospective study represents a limitation. Indeed, single-modality treatment of these tumors depends on multiple factors (size, location, and underlying cranial neuropathies). Considering the slow growth rate of GJTs, Longer-term follow-up of more than ten years and quality of life evaluation warranted further prospective research to assess the effectiveness and safety of GKS as a primary mode of treatment for these tumors.
Our experience stands and supports most of the published series regarding the established role of GKRS as a highly effective tool for most GJT patients' treatment with a tumor control rate of 93.8% at an extended mean follow-up of 87.7 months with a low rate of morbidity. Among the Several management options for GJT patients, documented GKRS favorable outcomes are very challenging and even comparable to microsurgery results. Therefore GKRS could be safely and effectively considered a first-line management option for most GJTs patients, excluding extensive giant tumors or those with an extension below the C2 vertebra.
For this study, formal consent is not required; it does not contain any studies with human participants.
No funding was received for this research.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests and certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial in the matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. We declare that this is an original article.
We want to thank Dr. Tiit Rahn, M.D., Ph.D. for long-term assistance in many patients evaluation and management, Dr. Mahmoud El Badrawy for assistance in dose calibration, treatment dose conformity and patient management, and we extremely grateful to Mrs. Hadeer Ezz for her sincere efforts in through patients direct communications and collection of patients paper and electronic data.
Corresponding author
Co-authors
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
