Hi Richard,
Here is another link where Rick (QRM) reported on his surgery at House Ear Clinic:
http://anausa.org/forum/index.php?topic=8621.0In one of those posts, he invited anyone in Singapore to drop him a line, so you might want to send him a personal message.
Some specific answers to your questions, as best I can:
1. The length is the most common measurement given in an MRI report. They may want all the dimensions if they needed to know the volume, in preparation for a radiation treatment, for instance. They would typically do another MRI specifically for that purpose at the time.
2. The diffuse enhancement would not indicate anything about whether the tumor is growing or not. The only way to tell that is a series of MRIs, several months or more apart. The diffuseness might indicate that the tumor is somewhat older or dormant, I don't really know about that.
3. Several people have reported hearing preservation with GK; Nancy Drew, who had GK last November, being the case that comes to mind.
4. CK is a little bit better for hearing preservation, and the extra cost is usually because it is three treatments instead of just one. It gives the best chance of retaining hearing, but the chance with GK is still good as well.
5. Both GK and CK have very good tumor control results, generally considered about equal and around the 98% mark.
6. The other machines, including Novalis, are now being used for a treatment protocol very similar to CK. The results indicate that they can be about as good as GK and CK, though I think the claim that they can do any better is not substantiated. CK is still the only system that monitors head position in real time during treatment, giving the best accuracy in practice. You might want to check out the Cyberknife forum for more comments on the various systems:
http://www.cyberknife.com/Forum.aspx.
My own feeling is that in the hands of a good radiation oncologist who has treated ANs and other brain tumors, any of the systems can deliver a good result. In the end, whether hearing is preserved is probably determined mostly by the particular AN and the condition of the cochlea and hearing nerve at the time of treatment, than it is by the type of radiation equipment used.
Another possibility is to simply watch and wait, and have another MRI in six months. If the hearing is not deteriorating and the AN is not growing, just watching it may be the best thing to do.
Best wishes to your mother,
Steve