mcrue, my point is that the stats you have from Dr. Chang are much different than those from other physicians and centers of excellence (which they openly share). Maybe Stanford just has worse surgical results than other facilities because they are biased towards Cyberknife for most patients and only perform microsurgery on the largest and most difficult ANs. Whatever the answer is, it is important that those choosing a procedure are not skewed by the results from one physician, but look at the results from the facility/physician they are considering treatment from.
I'm not advocating any particular procedure because both surgery and radiation have risks and pros/cons, just looking to clarify the data. Of course, we are all also welcome to our own opinion, but I am more a data driven person.
UpstateNY, I am a fact-driven person as well, and as you know statistics in general can be manipulated/swayed in many different ways to favor almost any result.
Stanford is known for its world-renowned higher education and is one of the centers of excellence for treating acoustic neuromas. I highly doubt they have lower surgical results, as you implied, compared to other institutions.
As you know, many people have even accused the House Clinic to be biased towards microsurgery, similar as you have suggested Dr. Chang is in favor towards Cyber knife.
To make your point, Dr. Schwartz said he has only lost 1 person in his entire career from an untreated blood clot several weeks post-op. So yes, the team makes a huge difference. But that doesn't take away from the stat Dr. Chang provided that on average, 1 in 500 die on the table. Not at House. Not at Stanford. But on average.
It is important for those choosing a procedure to absorb the facts and statistics regarding AN's as a whole.
As I mentioned earlier, the bottom line is the stat was provided to give perspective to that patient who is fearful of later developing radiation-induced cancer from Cyber Knife or Gamma Knife, so they may be persuaded to favor radiation treatment.
I don't think the stat should be wholly dismissed just because it comes from a radiation oncologist. As you said, everyone is entitled and free to have their own opinions.
Again, if anyone wants clarity on the statistic provided by Dr. Chang, I advise them to contact Dr. Chang.