Hyunwoo Do1, Varun R Kshettry2, Alan Siu1, Irina Belinsky3, Christopher J Farrell1, Gurston Nyquist4, Marc Rosen5, James J Evans6. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Department of Neurological Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Department of Neurological Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 3. Skull Base Division, Neuro-Ophthalmology Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Department of Ophthalmology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. 4. Department of Otolaryngology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 5. Department of Otolaryngology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Department of Neurological Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 6. Department of Neurological Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Department of Otolaryngology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Electronic address: james.evans@jefferson.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes after endoscopic endonasal surgery for recurrent or residual pituitary adenomas. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 61 patients from 2009 to 2016 who underwent endoscopic endonasal surgery for recurrent or residual pituitary adenomas after previous microscopic or endoscopic transsphenoidal operation. RESULTS: The previous surgical approach was endoscopic endonasal in 55.7% and microscopic in 44.2% of patients. The mean preoperative maximal tumor diameter was 2.3 cm. Tumor commonly invaded the suprasellar cistern (63.9%). Gross total resection (GTR) was achieved in 31 patients (51.7%). GTR rate was 68.4% and 21.7% for Knosp grade 0-2 and grade 3-4 tumors, respectively (P < 0.001). GTR was 73.1% and 35.3% for patients with previous microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery, respectively (P = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, smaller tumor size (odds ratio [OR], 1.1 per cm; P = 0.007), Knosp grade 0-2 (OR, 9.7; P = 0.002), and previous microscopic approach (OR, 12.7; P = 0.007) were independent predictors of GTR. Preoperative visual deficit outcome was improved in 32.5%, unchanged in 62.5%, and worse in 5.0%. New postoperative endocrinopathies included adrenal insufficiency (6.5%), hypothyroidism (8.1%), hypogonadism (6.5%), and diabetes insipidus (4.9%). Complications included postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (4.9%), meningitis (1.6%), medical complications (4.9%), and postoperative hematoma requiring re-exploration (3.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic endonasal approach provides a safe and effective option for recurrent pituitary adenomas. Smaller tumor size, absence of cavernous sinus invasion, and previous microscopic approach were independent predictors of GTR. This finding might suggest that inadequate exposure or limited viewing angle may adversely affect extent of resection in primary microscopic surgeries.
OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes after endoscopic endonasal surgery for recurrent or residual pituitary adenomas. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 61 patients from 2009 to 2016 who underwent endoscopic endonasal surgery for recurrent or residual pituitary adenomas after previous microscopic or endoscopic transsphenoidal operation. RESULTS: The previous surgical approach was endoscopic endonasal in 55.7% and microscopic in 44.2% of patients. The mean preoperative maximal tumor diameter was 2.3 cm. Tumor commonly invaded the suprasellar cistern (63.9%). Gross total resection (GTR) was achieved in 31 patients (51.7%). GTR rate was 68.4% and 21.7% for Knosp grade 0-2 and grade 3-4 tumors, respectively (P < 0.001). GTR was 73.1% and 35.3% for patients with previous microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery, respectively (P = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, smaller tumor size (odds ratio [OR], 1.1 per cm; P = 0.007), Knosp grade 0-2 (OR, 9.7; P = 0.002), and previous microscopic approach (OR, 12.7; P = 0.007) were independent predictors of GTR. Preoperative visual deficit outcome was improved in 32.5%, unchanged in 62.5%, and worse in 5.0%. New postoperative endocrinopathies included adrenal insufficiency (6.5%), hypothyroidism (8.1%), hypogonadism (6.5%), and diabetes insipidus (4.9%). Complications included postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (4.9%), meningitis (1.6%), medical complications (4.9%), and postoperative hematoma requiring re-exploration (3.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic endonasal approach provides a safe and effective option for recurrent pituitary adenomas. Smaller tumor size, absence of cavernous sinus invasion, and previous microscopic approach were independent predictors of GTR. This finding might suggest that inadequate exposure or limited viewing angle may adversely affect extent of resection in primary microscopic surgeries.
Authors: Navid Redjal; Andrew S Venteicher; Danielle Dang; Andrew Sloan; Remi A Kessler; Rebecca R Baron; Constantinos G Hadjipanayis; Clark C Chen; Mateo Ziu; Jeffrey J Olson; Brian V Nahed Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-02-21 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Luke Galloway; Mohamed Ali; Andrew Lansdown; Peter Taylor; Aled Rees; John Stephen Davies; Caroline Hayhurst Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Benjamin F Bitner; Brandon M Lehrich; Arash Abiri; Tyler M Yasaka; Frank P K Hsu; Edward C Kuan Journal: Pituitary Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 4.107
Authors: Elizaveta I Kozlikina; Kanamat T Efendiev; Andrey Yu Grigoriev; Olesia Y Bogdanova; Igor S Trifonov; Vladimir V Krylov; Victor B Loschenov Journal: Bioengineering (Basel) Date: 2022-01-28
Authors: Alberto Acitores Cancela; Víctor Rodríguez Berrocal; Héctor Pian; Juan Salvador Martínez San Millán; Juan José Díez; Pedro Iglesias Journal: Hormones (Athens) Date: 2021-06-19 Impact factor: 2.885
Authors: Andrej Pala; Andreas Knoll; Max Schneider; Gwendolin Etzrodt-Walter; Georg Karpel-Massler; Christian Rainer Wirtz; Michal Hlavac Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-01-17 Impact factor: 3.677