| Literature DB >> 32546762 |
Yang Liu1, Tao Zheng2,3, Wenhai Lv2, Long Chen2, Binfang Zhao2, Xue Jiang2, Lin Ye4, Liang Qu2, Lanfu Zhao2, Yufu Zhang2, Yafei Xue2, Lei Chen2,3, Bolin Liu2,3, Yingxi Wu2, Zhengmin Li5, Jiangtao Niu5, Ruigang Li2,3, Yan Qu2, Guodong Gao2, Yuan Wang6, Shiming He7.
Abstract
Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal resection has been accepted as a routine therapy for pituitary adenoma, but the postoperative hospital stay is typically several days long. With the advantages of reduced cost and improved patient satisfaction, the application of ambulatory surgery (AS) has developed rapidly. However, AS was still rarely adopted in neurosurgery. Here we designed an AS treatment protocol for pituitary adenoma with the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA), and reported our initial experiences regarding the safety and efficacy of the AS protocol. 63 patients who presented with pituitary adenoma were screened at the Department of Neurosurgery, Tangdu Hospital from July to September, 2017. A total of 20 pituitary adenoma patients who met the inclusion criteria underwent EEA surgery using this evidence-based AS protocol, which emphasized adequate assessment for eligibility, full preparation to minimize invasiveness, enhanced recovery, and active perioperative patient education. Of the 20 patients enrolled, 18 were discharged on the afternoon of the operation day with a median total length of stay (LOS) of 31 hours (range, 29-32) hours. The median LOS after surgery was 6.5 (range, 5-8) hours. Two patients were transferred from the AS protocol to conventional care due to intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leakage (one case) and an unsatisfying post-anesthetic discharge score (one case). Complications included transient and reversible mild postoperative nausea and vomiting [visual analog scale (VAS) score <3], headache (VAS score <3) after the operation or early after discharge. No patient was readmitted. Our results supported the safety and efficacy of the AS protocol for pituitary adenoma patients undergoing EEA resection among eligible patients, and further evaluation of this protocol in controlled studies with a larger sample size is warranted.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32546762 PMCID: PMC7297807 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-66826-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Clinical data of 63 patients screened for pituitary adenoma resection.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Median age in years (range) | 47 (18–65) |
| Female sex, no. (%) | 36(57%) |
| Median BMI (range, kg/m2) | 23.7 (17.0–28.9) |
| Mean maximum diameter(range, cm) | 2.7 ± 0.8 (1.2–4.9) |
| Knosp grade | |
| Knosp grade 1, no. (%) | 12(19%) |
| Knosp grade 2, no. (%) | 29(46%) |
| Knosp grade 3, no. (%) | 14 (22%) |
| Knosp grade 4, no. (%) | 8(13%) |
| Nonfunctioning | 31(49%) |
| Endoscopy surgery in AS protocol | 20 |
| Endoscopy surgery in non-AS protocol | 11 |
| Prolactin secreting | 24(38%) |
| Dopamine agonist | 13 |
| Endoscopy surgery in non-AS protocol | 11 |
| Growth hormone secreting | 6(10%) |
| Endoscopy surgery in non-AS protocol | 6 |
| Adrenocorticotropic hormone secreting | 2(3%) |
| Endoscopy surgery in non-AS protocol | 2 |
Demographic of 20 patients receiving ambulatory surgery with endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenoma resection.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Median age in years (range) | 38 (22–62) |
| Female sex, no. (%) | 13(65%) |
| Median BMI (range, kg/m2) | 21.8 (17.1–27.9) |
| Clinical presentations | |
| Field defects | 11 (55%) |
| Headache | 7 (35%) |
| Menstrual dysfunction | 2(10%) |
| No evident symptom | 2 (10%) |
| Mean maximum diameter(range, cm) | 2.2 ± 0.3 (1.6–2.7) |
| Knosp grade | |
| Knosp grade 1, no. (%) | 5(25%) |
| Knosp grade 2, no. (%) | 15(75%) |
| Hardy-Wilson grade | |
| Grade I, no. (%) | 0(0%) |
| Grade II, no. (%) | 20(100%) |
| Grade IIa, no. (%) | 4(20%) |
| Grade IIb, no. (%) | 16(80%) |
| ASA class | |
| I, no. (%) | 15 (75%) |
| II, no. (%) | 5 (25%) |
| Preoperative health and comorbidities | |
| Current smoker, no. (%) | 5(25%) |
| Diabetes, no. (%) | 2(10%) |
| Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (Apnea–hypopnea index <15), no. (%) | 1 (5%) |
| Hypertension requiring medication, no. (%) | 3(15%) |
| Coronary artery disease, no. (%) | 1 (5%) |
*ASA grade: American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status grade.
Length of stay and perioperative outcomes.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Median duration of the operation in min (min, 1stQ, 3rd Q, max) | 82 (70,75, 85,115) |
| Patients Transferred to inpatient care (no.) | 2 |
| CSF rhinorrhea during the operation | 1 |
| Severe PONV after operation | 0 |
| Poorly controlled headache (VAS scoreå 7) | 1 |
| Patients discharged on the operation day (no.) | 18 |
| Median LOS after surgery in hrs (min, 1stQ, 3rd Q, max) | 6.5 (5, 6, 7.5, 8) |
| Median total LOS in hrs (min, 1stQ, 3rd Q, max) | 31 (29, 31, 31, 32) |
| Discharge PADSS score | |
| PADSS = 9 (no.) | 12 |
| PADSS = 10 (no.) | 8 |
| Discharge KPS score | |
| KPS = 70 | 3 |
| KPS = 80 | 12 |
| KPS = 90 | 5 |
| KPS = 100 | 0 |
| Postoperative complications within 8 hours after surgery | |
| Mild PONV (VAS <3) | 4 |
| Minor bleeding | 0 |
| Mild headache (VAS <3) | 6 |
| Visual impairment | 0 |
| Transient diabetes insipidus | 0 |
| Follow-up postoperative complications (1 month) | |
| Mild PONV (VAS <3) | 0 |
| Minor bleeding | 0 |
| Mild headache (VAS <3) | 2 |
| Visual impairment | 0 |
| Transient diabetes insipidus | 0 |
| Olfactory impairment | 3 |
| Re-admission | 0 |
*LOS: Length of stay.
PADSS: Post-anesthetic discharge scoring system.
KPS: Karnofsky Performance Score.
PONV: Postoperative nausea and vomiting.
VAS: Visual analog scale.
CSF: Cerebrospinal fluid.