| Literature DB >> 32181181 |
Revaz Semenovich Dzhindzhikhadze1,2, Oleg Nikolaevich Dreval1, Valeriy Aleksandrovich Lazarev1, Andrey Victorovich Polyakov1,2, Renat Leonidovich Kambiev2, Elvira Igorevna Salyamova1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evolution of skull base approaches associated with individualization of surgical corridor and minimizing the collateral damage. Achieving the radical removal of tumor and preserving the neurological status of the patient is possible, both with the traditional approaches and keyhole approaches. Our work presents experience using the transpalpebral approach (TPA) for microsurgical removal of tuberculum sellae meningioma (TSM).Entities:
Keywords: Keyhole surgery; minimally invasive neurosurgery; transpalpebral approach; tuberculum sellae meningioma
Year: 2020 PMID: 32181181 PMCID: PMC7057880 DOI: 10.4103/ajns.AJNS_186_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian J Neurosurg
Summary of 15 cases of tuberculum sellae meningiomas
| Case | Gender | Age | Max tumor size (mm) | Lateralization | Surgical time (min) | Blood loss (ml) | Extent of resection | Recurrence | Visual changes | Length of stay (days) | Follow-up period (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Male | 54 | 21.4 | Right | 200 | 50 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 10 |
| 2 | Female | 52 | 32.2 | None | 240 | 100 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 5 | 17 |
| 3 | Male | 48 | 20.3 | None | 175 | 50 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 8 |
| 4 | Female | 62 | 30.8 | None | 210 | 100 | Simpson II | None | None | 5 | 16 |
| 5 | Female | 60 | 38.1 | Right | 245 | 150 | Simpson II | None | None | 6 | 21 |
| 6 | Female | 55 | 25.6 | None | 215 | 50 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 18 |
| 7 | Female | 48 | 30.2 | None | 245 | 150 | Simpson IV | None | Improve | 5 | 14 |
| 8 | Male | 48 | 24.2 | None | 245 | 50 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 12 |
| 9 | Male | 75 | 25.1 | Right | 220 | 100 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 5 | 14 |
| 10 | Female | 69 | 39.2 | Right | 275 | 300 | Simpson IV | + | None | 7 | 11 |
| 11 | Female | 60 | 37.7 | Left | 230 | 150 | Simpson II | None | None | 5 | 20 |
| 12 | Female | 52 | 29.9 | None | 225 | 150 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 6 | 22 |
| 13 | Female | 51 | 26.1 | None | 200 | 50 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 7 |
| 14 | Male | 59 | 38.7 | Left | 230 | 200 | Simpson IV | None | Transient worsering | 7 | 24 |
| 15 | Female | 64 | 30.7 | Left | 235 | 100 | Simpson II | None | Improve | 4 | 19 |
+: Rec
Figure 1Projections of skin, subcutaneous tissue, and musculus orbicuaris oculi incision (Black line). Yellow line – projections of facial nerve branches
Figure 2Steps of performing transpalpebral approach. (a) Skin incision. (b and c) Soft-tissue dissection. (d) Burr hole forming with a high-speed drill. (e and f) Mini-orbitofrontal craniotomy
Summary of motor and sensory limbs function, visual outcomes
| Parameter | Motor function | Sensory function | Visual changes | mRs | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases/ Months | 3 | 6 | 3 | 6 | Preoperative | 3 | 6 | 12 | 3 | 6 | 12 | ||||||||
| Acuity | Visual fields Left|right | Acuity | Visual fields Left|right | Acuity | Visual fields Left|right | Acuity | Visual fields Left|right | ||||||||||||
| Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | ||||||||||||
| 1 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 2 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 3 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 4 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| 5 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.6 | 0 | 0.6 | 0 | 0.6 | 0 | 0.6 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| 6 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 7 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 8 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 09 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 10 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| 11 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| 12 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 13 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 14* | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.02 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.6 | 0 | 0.7 | 3 | 3 | 2 | ||||
| 15 | NW | NW | NP | NP | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
Case 14* had transient visual worsening for 4 days with slow improvement in 1 month. NW – No limbs weakness. NP – No limbs paresthesia, mRs – modified Rankin Scale
Postoperative complications after transpalpebral approach
| Complication | Number of complications, |
|---|---|
| Wound infection | 0 |
| CSF leakage | 0 |
| Epidural, subdural hematoma | 0 |
| Traction damage | 2 (13.3) |
| Endocrinologic complications | 0 |
| Postoperative seizure | 0 |
| Cognitive worsening | 3 (20) |
| Keloid scar | 0 |
| Lethal cases in 12 months follow-up | 0 |
CSF – Cerebrospinal fluid
Satisfaction with the postoperative cosmetic outcome after transpalpebral approach in 15 patients
| Scale of satisfaction | Number of cases, |
|---|---|
| Unsatisfactory | 0 |
| Good | 2 (13.3) |
| Excellent | 13 (86.7) |
Figure 3Preoperative planning transpalpebral approach. (a-c). Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging with cerebrospinal fluid, tuberculum sellae meningioma. (d) Projection line of skin incision (arrow). (e and f) Virtual craniotomy, planning of transpalpebral approach in computer model. (g and h) Using the neuronavigation to mark the frontal sinus
Figure 4Intraoperative pictures, microsurgical removal of tuberculum sellae meningioma through transpalpebral approach. (a) Dural opening. (b) Basal cistern opening, brain relaxation. (c) Tumor debulking with ultrasonic aspirator. (d) Tumor resecting partially with microscissors. (e) Part of meningioma removing through small craniotomy. (f) Endoscope assistance. (g-i) 1-month postoperative magnetic resonance imaging with cerebrospinal fluid
Figure 5(a-d) Cosmetic outcomes after transpalpebral approach