Transbasal versus endoscopic endonasal versus combined approaches for olfactory groove meningiomas: importance of approach selection

被引:39
作者
Liu, James K. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Silva, Nicole A. [1 ]
Sevak, Ilesha A. [1 ]
Eloy, Jean Anderson [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Dept Neurol Surg, Newark, NJ USA
[2] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Newark, NJ USA
[3] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Dept Ophthalmol & Visual Sci, Newark, NJ USA
[4] Rutgers New Jersey Med Sch, Neurol Inst New Jersey, Ctr Skull Base & Pituitary Surg, Newark, NJ USA
关键词
olfactory groove meningiomas; endoscopic endonasal approach; transbasal approach; combined approach; skull base meningiomas; endoscopic skull base surgery; anterior skull base; ANTERIOR CRANIAL BASE; SURGICAL-TREATMENT; PTERIONAL APPROACH; RESECTION; RECURRENCE; MANAGEMENT; SINONASAL; DEFECTS; SERIES;
D O I
10.3171/2018.1.FOCUS17722
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE There has been much debate regarding the optimal surgical approach for resecting olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). In this paper, the authors analyzed the factors involved in approach selection and reviewed the surgical outcomes in a series of OGMs. METHODS A retrospective review of 28 consecutive OGMs from a prospective database was conducted. Each tumor was treated via one of 3 approaches: transbasal approach (n = 15), pure endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA; n = 5), and combined (endoscope-assisted) transbasal-EEA (n = 8). RESULTS The mean tumor volume was greatest in the transbasal (92.02 cm(3)) and combined (101.15 cm(3)) groups. Both groups had significant lateral dural extension over the orbits (transbasal 73.3%, p < 0.001; combined 100%), while the transbasal group had the most cerebral edema (73.3%, p < 0.001) and vascular involvement (66.7%, p < 0.001), and the least presence of a cortical cuff (33.3%, p = 0.019). All tumors in the combined group were recurrent tumors that invaded into the sinonasal cavity. The purely EEA group had the smallest mean tumor volume (33.33 cm(3)), all with a cortical cuff and no lateral dural extension. Gross-total resection was achieved in 80% of transbasal, 100% of EEA, and 62.5% of combined cases. Near-total resection (> 95%) was achieved in 20% of transbasal and 37.5% of combined cases, all due to tumor adherence to the critical neurovascular structures. The rate of CSF leakage was 0% in the transbasal and combined groups, and there was 1 leak in the EEA group (20%), resulting in an overall CSF leakage rate of 3.6%. Olfaction was preserved in 66.7% in the transbasal group. There was no significant difference in length of stay or 30-day readmission rate between the 3 groups. The mean modified Rankin Scale score was 0.79 after the transbasal approach, 2.0 after EEA, and 2.4 after the combined approach (p = 0.0604). The mean follow-up was 14.5 months (range 1-76 months). CONCLUSIONS The transbasal approach provided the best clinical outcomes with the lowest rate of complications for large tumors (> 40 mm) and for smaller tumors (< 40 mm) with intact olfaction. The role of EEA appears to be limited to smaller, appropriately selected tumors in which olfaction is already absent. EEA also plays an important adjunctive role when combined with the transbasal approach for recurrent OGMs invading the sinonasal cavity. Careful patient selection using an individualized, tailored strategy is important to optimize surgical outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 49 条
  • [31] Compare the Outcome of Endoscopic Endonasal versus Transcranial Approach for Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak Repair
    Mushtaq, Mohammad
    Ali, Haider
    UL Haq, Naeem
    Ullah, Muhammad Anwar
    Shah, Anwar
    Ali, Saqib
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2021, 15 (08): : 2224 - 2227
  • [32] Efficacy of simultaneous pericranial and nasoseptal "double flap" reconstruction of anterior skull base defects after combined transbasal and endoscopic endonasal approaches
    Gabriel, Phabinly J.
    Kohli, Gurkirat
    Hsueh, Wayne D.
    Eloy, Jean Anderson
    Liu, James K.
    ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2020, 162 (03) : 641 - 647
  • [33] Nasoseptal flap repair after endoscopic transsellar versus expanded endonasal approaches: Is there an increased risk of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak?
    Eloy, Jean Anderson
    Choudhry, Osamah J.
    Shukla, Pratik A.
    Kuperan, Arjuna B.
    Friedel, Mark E.
    Liu, James K.
    LARYNGOSCOPE, 2012, 122 (06) : 1219 - 1225
  • [34] In-Hospital Costs for Open versus Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Craniopharyngioma Resection
    Parasher, Arjun K.
    Lerner, David K.
    Miranda, Stephen P.
    Douglas, Jennifer E.
    Glicksman, Jordan T.
    Alexander, Tyler
    Lin, Theodore
    Ebesutani, Darren
    Kohanski, Michael
    Lee, John Y. K.
    Storm, Phillip B.
    O'Malley, Bert W., Jr.
    Yoshor, Daniel
    Palmer, James N.
    Grady, M. Sean
    Adappa, Nithin D.
    LARYNGOSCOPE, 2023, 133 (01) : 83 - 87
  • [35] A comparison of endoscopic endonasal versus open approaches for skull base chordoma: a comprehensive National Cancer Database analysis
    Soffer, Justin M.
    Ulloa, Ruben
    Chen, Sonja
    Ziltzer, Ryan S.
    Patel, Vijay A.
    Polster, Sean P.
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2024, 56 (05)
  • [36] Endoscopic endonasal approach for suprasellar meningiomas: introduction of a new scoring system to predict extent of resection and assist in case selection with long-term outcome data
    Youngerman, Brett E.
    Banu, Matei A.
    Gerges, Mina M.
    Odigie, Eseosa
    Tabaee, Abtin
    Kacker, Ashutosh
    Anand, Vijay K.
    Schwartz, Theodore H.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 135 (01) : 113 - 125
  • [37] Craniopharyngioma resection by endoscopic endonasal approach versus transcranial approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
    Na, Min Kyun
    Jang, Bohyoung
    Choi, Kyu-Sun
    Lim, Tae Ho
    Kim, Wonhee
    Cho, Youngsuk
    Shin, Hyun-Goo
    Ahn, Chiwon
    Kim, Jae Guk
    Lee, Juncheol
    Kwon, Sae Min
    Lee, Heekyung
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [38] Craniotomy for perisellar meningiomas: comparison of simple (appropriate for endoscopic approach) versus complex anatomy and surgical outcomes
    Makarenko, Serge
    Carreras, Erick M.
    Akagami, Ryojo
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 126 (04) : 1191 - 1200
  • [39] Subtemporal Retrolabyrinthine (Posterior Petrosal) versus Endoscopic Endonasal Approach to the Petroclival Region: An Anatomical and Computed Tomography Study
    Mason, Eric
    Van Rompaey, Jason
    Solares, C. Arturo
    Figueroa, Ramon
    Prevedello, Daniel
    JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGICAL SURGERY PART B-SKULL BASE, 2016, 77 (03) : 231 - 237
  • [40] Long-term oncological outcomes for endoscopic endonasal versus open surgical approaches for anatomically matched, locally advanced stage T4 sinonasal malignancies with skull base involvement
    Schur, Solon
    Hanna, Ehab Y.
    Su, Shirley Y.
    Kupferman, Michael E.
    Demonte, Franco
    Raza, Shaan M.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2024, 140 (03) : 688 - 695