| Literature DB >> 36034373 |
Junyong Wu1,2, Binbin Zhang1,2, Dongqi Shao1,2, Shuxin Ji1,2, Yu Li1,2, Shan Xie1,2, Zhiquan Jiang1,2.
Abstract
Objective: This study investigated the use and effectiveness of endoscopic transnasal, transsphenoidal surgery, a minimally invasive method for the treatment of macroadenomas and giant pituitary a denomas, in a medical setting. The surgical results of 429 patients who received neuroendoscopic treatment of macroadenomas or giant pituitary adenomas were evaluated, and the experiences and lessons learned from treatment complications were assessed. Patients and methods: From January 2012 to December 2021, 429 patients with macroadenomas or giant pituitary adenomas, including 60 patients with giant adenomas (diameter ≥4 cm) and 369 patients with macroadenomas (diameter 1-4 cm), received a 3D head CT, a MRI with contrast enhancement, and an endocrinology examination prior to surgery. Preoperative clinical and radiological features, visual measurements, hormone levels, length of stay, length of surgery, postoperative stay, visual and hormone outcomes, resection range, complication and recurrence rates, and routine patient information were recorded. The patients were followed up for 6-72 months (median = 40 months).Entities:
Keywords: giant pituitary adenoma; macroadenoma; neuroendoscopy; pituitary surgery; transnasal butterfly approach
Year: 2022 PMID: 36034373 PMCID: PMC9403245 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.956345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Surg ISSN: 2296-875X
Patient demographics and adenoma characteristics (N = 429).
| Demographics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 195 | 45.45% |
| Female | 234 | 54.55% |
| Mean age (years) | 50.72 (8–78) | |
| LOS (length of stay) | 16.9 (8–32) | |
| Postoperative hospital stay | 8.4 (4–24) | |
| Diameter (average ± SD) (mm) | (26.57 ± 10.28) | |
| 10–19 | 128 | 29.84% |
| 20–29 | 131 | 30.54% |
| 30–39 | 110 | 25.64% |
| >40 | 60 | 13.98% |
| Knosp classification | ||
| Grade 0 | 129 | 30.1% |
| Grade 1 | 116 | 27.1% |
| Grade 2 | 96 | 22.4% |
| Grade 3A | 51 | 11.8% |
| Grade 3B | 27 | 6.3% |
| Grade 4 | 10 | 2.3% |
| Preoperative clinical signs and symptoms | ||
| Visual field defects | 278 | 64.80% |
| Anterior pituitary insufficiency | 85 | 19.81% |
| Headache | 159 | 37.06% |
| Drowsiness | 5 | 1.17% |
| Treatment | ||
| Endoscopic transnasal transsphenoidal surgery | 429 | 100% |
| Surgical complications | ||
| CSF leak | 39 | 9.09% |
| Intracranial infection | 4 | 0.93% |
| Loss of smell | 15 | 3.50% |
| Diabetes insipidus | 138 | 32.17% |
| Hypopituitarism | 16 | 3.70% |
| Epistaxis | 16 | 3.70% |
| Proliferation | ||
| Nonproliferative | 359 | 83.68% |
| Proliferative | 70 | 16.32% |
Figure 1(A–C) Neuroendoscopy for the treatment of macroadenomas and giant pituitary adenomas. the full floor could be observed in the sphenoid sinus (A), The diameter of the sellar bottom bone window was ground to 1–2 cm (B), the endoscope was extended into the adenoma cavity to explore and remove the residual adenoma (C).
Pathological characteristics.
| Cell types | |
|---|---|
| Non-functioning | 277 (64.57) |
| Prl | 110 (25.64) |
| GH | 34 (7.92) |
| ACTH | 6 (1.40) |
| TSH | 2 (0.47) |
| Ki-67 | |
| <3% | 325 (75.76) |
| 3%–5% | 74 (17.11) |
| >5% | 31 (7.13) |
| P53 | |
| Negative | 359 (83.68) |
| Positive | 51 (11.89) |
| Weak | 19 (4.43) |
Figure 2(A–H): This was a 50-year-old female patient who was admitted to hospital after the discovery of a pituitary tumor due to clinical manifestation. Preoperative MRI of a special giant pituitary adenoma (A–D). Postoperative MRI (E–H).
Preoperative symptoms that improved after surgery.
| Symptoms | Improved/Total (%) |
|---|---|
| Preoperative symptoms | |
| Visual field defects | 277/278 (99.6) |
| Anterior pituitary insufficiency | 44/85 (51.8) |
| Headache | 131/159 (82.4) |
| Drowsiness | 5/5 (100) |
| Syndrome | |
| CSF leak | 39/39 (100) |
| Intracranial infection | 4/4 (100) |
| Loss of smell | 10/15 (66.7) |
| Diabetes insipidus | 131/138 (94.9) |
| Hypopituitarism | 9/16 (56.3) |
| Epistaxis | 16/16 (100) |
Factors influencing adenoma resection.
| Tumor type | GTR (%) | NGTR* (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knosp classification | |||
| Grade 0 | 114 (88.37) | 15 (11.63) | <0.01 |
| Grade 1 | 103 (88.79) | 13 (11.21) | |
| Grade 2 | 75 (79.79) | 19 (20.21) | |
| Grade 3A | 35 (68.64) | 18 (31.37) | |
| Grade 3B | 17 (62.96) | 10 (37.04) | |
| Grade 4 | 4 (40) | 6 (60) | |
| Diameter (mm) | |||
| 10–19 | 114 (89.06) | 14 (10.94) | <0.01 |
| 20–29 | 117 (89.31) | 14 (10.69) | |
| 30–39 | 80 (76.19) | 25 (23.81) | |
| >40 | 37 (56.92) | 28 (43.08) | |
| Hormone secretion | |||
| NFPA | 221 (82.85) | 46 (17.25) | 0.261 |
| FPA | 127 (78.43) | 35 (21.67) | |
| Operative history | |||
| Primary | 339 (87.59) | 48 (12.41) | <0.01 |
| Recurrent | 9 (21.92) | 33 (78.18) | |
| Tumor shape | |||
| Rounded | 289 (92.04) | 25 (7.96) | <0.01 |
| Dumbbell | 35 (53.03) | 31 (46.97) | |
| Multilobular | 24 (48.98) | 25 (51.02) | |
Not total resection, including near total resection and a major resection.