Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Microscopic and Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Pituitary Tumor Resection

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 Medicine Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1788582
Asha Krishnakumar, Ashwin Ghadiyaram, Akshay K. Murthy, Charles F. Opalak, Theodore A. Schuman, William C. Broaddus
{"title":"Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Microscopic and Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Pituitary Tumor Resection","authors":"Asha Krishnakumar, Ashwin Ghadiyaram, Akshay K. Murthy, Charles F. Opalak, Theodore A. Schuman, William C. Broaddus","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1788582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>\n<b>Objectives</b> In recent years, the transnasal endoscopic method for transsphenoidal pituitary tumor resection (eTSR), alongside the conventional sublabial microscopic transsphenoidal resection (mTSR) method, has gained popularity due to advancements in imaging and instrumentation. The current study sought to elucidate whether the trend toward eTSR was associated with changes in clinical outcomes at a single institution's multidisciplinary pituitary surgery program.</p> <p>\n<b>Setting and Participants</b> The Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Brain Tumor Database was queried for patients who underwent either transnasal or sublabial pituitary tumor resection of pituitary tumors between 2009 and 2021.</p> <p>\n<b>Design</b> Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups.</p> <p>\n<b>Main Outcome Measures</b> Surgical outcomes like estimated blood loss (EBL), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and extent of resection were studied.</p> <p>\n<b>Results</b> A total of 93 patients (57 mTSR, 36 eTSR) underwent review, revealing that mTSR was associated with a higher average intraoperative blood loss (310.5 ± 48.6 mL) than eTSR (160.0 ± 30.7 mL; <i>p</i> = 0.012). eTSR demonstrated an elevated intraoperative CSF leak incidence (36.1 vs. 15.8%; <i>p</i> = 0.043), but no difference in postoperative CSF leak requiring intervention. Hospital LOS and extent of resection showed no significant differences between the approaches.</p> <p>\n<b>Conclusion</b> This single-institution, retrospective study suggests that, in experienced hands, both eTSR and mTSR approaches are effective with comparable risk profiles. The approach may be best determined by the surgical team's evaluation of the tumor's imaging features, paying attention to the patient's preoperative hematologic status due to the greater propensity for blood loss with the microscopic approach.</p> ","PeriodicalId":16513,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1788582","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives In recent years, the transnasal endoscopic method for transsphenoidal pituitary tumor resection (eTSR), alongside the conventional sublabial microscopic transsphenoidal resection (mTSR) method, has gained popularity due to advancements in imaging and instrumentation. The current study sought to elucidate whether the trend toward eTSR was associated with changes in clinical outcomes at a single institution's multidisciplinary pituitary surgery program.

Setting and Participants The Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Brain Tumor Database was queried for patients who underwent either transnasal or sublabial pituitary tumor resection of pituitary tumors between 2009 and 2021.

Design Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Main Outcome Measures Surgical outcomes like estimated blood loss (EBL), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and extent of resection were studied.

Results A total of 93 patients (57 mTSR, 36 eTSR) underwent review, revealing that mTSR was associated with a higher average intraoperative blood loss (310.5 ± 48.6 mL) than eTSR (160.0 ± 30.7 mL; p = 0.012). eTSR demonstrated an elevated intraoperative CSF leak incidence (36.1 vs. 15.8%; p = 0.043), but no difference in postoperative CSF leak requiring intervention. Hospital LOS and extent of resection showed no significant differences between the approaches.

Conclusion This single-institution, retrospective study suggests that, in experienced hands, both eTSR and mTSR approaches are effective with comparable risk profiles. The approach may be best determined by the surgical team's evaluation of the tumor's imaging features, paying attention to the patient's preoperative hematologic status due to the greater propensity for blood loss with the microscopic approach.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
显微镜和内窥镜经蝶垂体瘤切除术的临床效果比较
目的 近年来,由于成像和器械的进步,经鼻内窥镜经蝶垂体瘤切除术(eTSR)与传统的腔镜下显微经蝶垂体瘤切除术(mTSR)并驾齐驱。本研究旨在阐明在一家机构的多学科垂体手术项目中,eTSR的趋势是否与临床结果的变化有关。研究背景和参与者 在弗吉尼亚联邦大学(VCU)脑肿瘤数据库中查询了2009年至2021年期间接受经鼻或经腔下垂体瘤切除术的垂体瘤患者。设计 比较两组患者的临床结果。主要结果指标 研究估计失血量(EBL)、脑脊液(CSF)漏率、住院时间(LOS)和切除范围等手术结果。结果 共对 93 例患者(57 例 mTSR,36 例 eTSR)进行了复查,结果显示,mTSR 的术中平均失血量(310.5 ± 48.6 mL)高于 eTSR(160.0 ± 30.7 mL;p = 0.012);eTSR 的术中 CSF 漏发生率较高(36.1 vs. 15.8%;p = 0.043),但术后需要干预的 CSF 漏没有差异。两种方法的住院时间和切除范围无明显差异。结论 这项单一机构的回顾性研究表明,在经验丰富的医生手中,eTSR 和 mTSR 两种方法都很有效,而且风险情况相当。最佳方法可能是由手术团队评估肿瘤的影像学特征来决定,同时注意患者术前的血液学状况,因为显微镜方法更容易失血。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
516
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base (JNLS B) is a major publication from the world''s leading publisher in neurosurgery. JNLS B currently serves as the official organ of several national and international neurosurgery and skull base societies. JNLS B is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles, and technical notes covering all aspects of neurological surgery. The focus of JNLS B includes microsurgery as well as the latest minimally invasive techniques, such as stereotactic-guided surgery, endoscopy, and endovascular procedures. JNLS B is devoted to the techniques and procedures of skull base surgery.
期刊最新文献
Characterizing Hearing Outcomes Following Treatment of Cerebellopontine Angle Meningiomas Deskeletonizing the Sigmoid Sinus Is Noncompulsory in Skull Base Surgery: 3D Modeling of the Translabyrinthine Approach Supra Digastric Muscles Approach for Styloid Process Resection A Multicenter Study of Unplanned Hospital Readmissions after Transsphenoidal Surgery for Cushing's Disease Careers in Skull Base and Open Cerebrovascular Surgery: Factors Associated with Academic Job Placement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1