Literature DB >> 29749920

Evolution of the graded repair of CSF leaks and skull base defects in endonasal endoscopic tumor surgery: trends in repair failure and meningitis rates in 509 patients.

Andrew Conger1, Fan Zhao2, Xiaowen Wang2, Amalia Eisenberg3, Chester Griffiths3, Felice Esposito4, Ricardo L Carrau5, Garni Barkhoudarian3, Daniel F Kelly3.   

Abstract

Objective: The authors previously described a graded approach to skull base repair following endonasal microscopic or endoscope-assisted tumor surgery. In this paper they review their experience with skull base reconstruction in the endoscopic era.
Methods: A retrospective review of a single-institution endonasal endoscopic patient database (April 2010–April 2017) was undertaken. Intraoperative CSF leaks were graded based on size (grade 0 [no leak], 1, 2, or 3), and repair technique was documented across grades. The series was divided into 2 epochs based on implementation of a strict perioperative antibiotic protocol and more liberal use of permanent and/or temporary buttresses; repair failure rates and postoperative meningitis rates were assessed for the 2 epochs and compared.
Results: In total, 551 operations were performed in 509 patients for parasellar pathology, including pituitary adenoma (66%), Rathke’s cleft cyst (7%), meningioma (6%), craniopharyngioma (4%), and other (17%). Extended approaches were used in 41% of cases. There were 9 postoperative CSF leaks (1.6%) and 6 cases of meningitis (1.1%). Postoperative leak rates for all 551 operations by grade 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 0%, 1.9%, 3.1%, and 4.8%, respectively. Fat grafts were used in 33%, 84%, 97%, and 100% of grade 0, 1, 2, and 3 leaks, respectively. Pedicled mucosal flaps (78 total) were used in 2.6% of grade 0–2 leaks (combined) and 79.5% of grade 3 leaks (60 nasoseptal and 6 middle turbinate flaps). Nasoseptal flap usage was highest for craniopharyngioma operations (80%) and lowest for pituitary adenoma operations (2%). Two (3%) nasoseptal flaps failed. Contributing factors for the 9 repair failures were BMI ≥ 30 (7/9), lack of buttress (4/9), grade 3 leak (4/9), and postoperative vomiting (4/9). Comparison of the epochs showed that grade 1–3 repair failures decreased from 6/143 (4.1%) to 3/141 (2.1%) and grade 1–3 meningitis rates decreased from 5 (3.5%) to 1 (0.7%) (p = 0.08). Prophylactic lumbar CSF drainage was used in only 4 cases (< 1%), was associated with a higher meningitis rate in grades 1–3 (25% vs 2%), and was discontinued in 2012. Comparison of the 2 epochs showed increase buttress use in the second, with use of a permanent buttress in grade 1 and 3 leaks increasing from 13% to 55% and 32% to 76%, respectively (p < 0.001), and use of autologous septal/keel bone as a permanent buttress in grade 1, 2, and 3 leaks increasing from 15% to 51% (p < 0.001). Conclusions: A graded approach to skull base repair after endonasal surgery remains valid in the endoscopic era. However, the technique has evolved significantly, with further reduction of postoperative CSF leak rates. These data suggest that buttresses are beneficial for repair of most grade 1 and 2 leaks and all grade 3 leaks. Similarly, pedicled flaps appear advantageous for grade 3 leaks, while CSF diversion may be unnecessary and a risk factor for meningitis. High BMI should prompt an aggressive multilayered repair strategy. Achieving repair failure and meningitis rates lower than 1% is a reasonable goal in endoscopic skull base tumor surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CNS = Congress of Neurological Surgeons; POD = postoperative day; cerebrospinal fluid leak; chordoma; craniopharyngioma; endonasal surgery; endoscopic surgery; lumbar drain; meningioma; meningitis; pituitary adenoma; pituitary surgery; skull base tumor

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29749920     DOI: 10.3171/2017.11.JNS172141

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  39 in total

1.  Transnasal Transsphenoidal Approach for Pituitary Tumors: An ENT Perspective.

Authors:  Vaibhav A Chandankhede; S K Singh; Ravi Roy; Sunil Goyal; M S Sridhar; M S Gill
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2020-02-11

2.  Acellular dermal matrix as an alternative to autologous fascia lata for skull base repair following extended endoscopic endonasal approaches.

Authors:  Brett E Youngerman; Jennifer A Kosty; Mina M Gerges; Abtin Tabaee; Ashutosh Kacker; Vijay K Anand; Theodore H Schwartz
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 2.216

3.  Microsurgical versus endoscopic trans-sphenoidal approaches for clivus chordoma: a pooled and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Delia Cannizzaro; Maria Pia Tropeano; Davide Milani; Riccardo Spaggiari; Ismail Zaed; Cristina Mancarella; Giovanni Battista Lasio; Maurizio Fornari; Franco Servadei; Andrea Cardia
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 3.042

4.  Risk Factors and Reconstruction Techniques for Persistent Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Endonasal Approach to the Posterior Fossa.

Authors:  Sergio Torres-Bayona; Nathalia Velasquez; Ana Nakassa; Aldo Eguiluz-Melendez; Vanessa Hernandez; Belen Vega; Hamid Borghei-Razavi; Yeiris Miranda-Acosta; Eric W Wang; Carl H Snyderman; Paul A Gardner
Journal:  J Neurol Surg B Skull Base       Date:  2021-05-17

Review 5.  Multidisciplinary management of acromegaly: A consensus.

Authors:  Andrea Giustina; Garni Barkhoudarian; Albert Beckers; Anat Ben-Shlomo; Nienke Biermasz; Beverly Biller; Cesar Boguszewski; Marek Bolanowski; Jens Bollerslev; Vivien Bonert; Marcello D Bronstein; Michael Buchfelder; Felipe Casanueva; Philippe Chanson; David Clemmons; Maria Fleseriu; Anna Maria Formenti; Pamela Freda; Monica Gadelha; Eliza Geer; Mark Gurnell; Anthony P Heaney; Ken K Y Ho; Adriana G Ioachimescu; Steven Lamberts; Edward Laws; Marco Losa; Pietro Maffei; Adam Mamelak; Moises Mercado; Mark Molitch; Pietro Mortini; Alberto M Pereira; Stephan Petersenn; Kalmon Post; Manuel Puig-Domingo; Roberto Salvatori; Susan L Samson; Ilan Shimon; Christian Strasburger; Brooke Swearingen; Peter Trainer; Mary L Vance; John Wass; Margaret E Wierman; Kevin C J Yuen; Maria Chiara Zatelli; Shlomo Melmed
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2020-09-10       Impact factor: 6.514

6.  Continuous dural suturing for closure of grade 3 leaks after tumor removal via an endoscopic endonasal approach.

Authors:  Hai Xue; Zhijun Yang; Jian Liu; Xingchao Wang; Zhiyong Bi; Pinan Liu
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.042

7.  Closure of skull base defects after endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery: the role of the local sphenoid mucosal flap for low flow leaks.

Authors:  Mendel Castle-Kirszbaum; Yi Yuen Wang; Brent Uren; Ben Dixon; Joanne Rimmer; James King; Yi Chen Zhao; Tony Goldschlager
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 3.042

8.  Deployment of a bioabsorbable plate as the rigid buttress for skull base repair after endoscopic pituitary surgery.

Authors:  Qichao Qi; Yongpeng Zhang; Junpeng Wang; Hanlin Zhong; Haijun Chen; Chuanwei Wang; Jiangang Wang; Xiaolan Cai; Lei Sun; Shilei Ni
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-03

9.  Surgical complications of endoscopic approach to skull base: analysis of 584 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Mohammad Taghvaei; Sara Fallah; Shokufeh Sadaghiani; Seyed Mousa Sadrhosseini; Azin Tabari; Mohammadreza Fathi; Mehdi Zeinalizadeh
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Complication avoidance protocols in endoscopic pituitary adenoma surgery: a retrospective cohort study in 514 patients.

Authors:  Jai Deep Thakur; Alex Corlin; Regin Jay Mallari; Samantha Yawitz; Amalia Eisenberg; Walavan Sivakumar; Chester Griffiths; Ricardo L Carrau; Sarah Rettinger; Pejman Cohan; Howard Krauss; Katherine A Araque; Garni Barkhoudarian; Daniel F Kelly
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 4.107

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.