Hi,
OK, I will go first. My story is not the typical success radiation story. When I was diagnosed my AN was already quite big (approaching 3 cm), although at the time of diagnosis I had been told that it was 2.4 cm (after I learned how to read my MRIs I realized that the value had been underestimated). Anyway, at that point in time I was just coming back from maternity leave from my second child. Having two very young children, being just back to work with a very demanding job and not having any help close by from family, that was a really terrible time for me to have surgery. So I opted for the GK, even though I knew that the size of my AN was borderline.
I went through the treatment with no problems and no side effects. I didn't miss a day of work. At 6 and 12 months the tumor showed darkening, but then it started slowly creeping up in size again. After last October's MRI I knew it was time to seek microsurgery. By that time my kids were already quite older, I was much more secure at job and my mother in law had retired and was able to come and help me out. I had the time to consult with many neurosurgeons (I live in a small city, so this involved quite a bit of travelling). I chose one quite far from were I live (5 hour flight), and finally I had surgery 3 years exactly after GK. The surgery went very well and I couldn't have wished for a better outcome.
So to your question: Am I sorry that I chose GK initially? I would answer no. I knew that in my case the chances of success weren't that great, because of the size. But GK did buy me valuable time, making it possible to find a competent team. If I had surgery upon original diagnosis it would probably be at the local facility with who knows what outcome.
I have corresponded with many other forumites who had GK, for ANs of sizes similar to yours (around 1-1.5 cm). All of them had very good outcomes. So I am confident that GK (and CK) are very good treatment choices.
Marianna
