Multi-center study on sellar reconstruction after endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery.

endoscopic sinus surgery pituitary pituitary adenoma sella sellar reconstruction transphenoidal

Journal

International forum of allergy & rhinology
ISSN: 2042-6984
Titre abrégé: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101550261

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
17 Jun 2024
Historique:
revised: 13 05 2024
received: 25 03 2024
accepted: 20 05 2024
medline: 17 6 2024
pubmed: 17 6 2024
entrez: 17 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Surgical techniques for sellar reconstruction include no reconstruction, use of synthetic materials, autologous grafts, and/or vascularized flaps. The aim of this study was to conduct a multi-center study comparing the efficacy and postoperative morbidity associated with different sellar reconstruction techniques. A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary tumors from five participating sites between January 2021 and March 2023 was performed. The variables included demographics, tumor characteristics, reconstruction technique, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (CSF) leak, and 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores. Comparisons of postoperative complications, SNOT-22 scores, and duration of surgery by type of onlay reconstruction were evaluated using Fisher's exact test, analysis of variance, and Kruskal‒Wallis test. Five hundred and one patients were identified. The median tumor size was 2.1 cm, and 64% were non-functioning. Intraoperative CSF leak was identified in 38% of patients. A total of 89% of patients underwent onlay reconstruction: 49% were reconstructed with mucosal grafts, 35% with nasoseptal flaps, and 5% with other onlay techniques. Nasoseptal flaps were utilized more frequently in the setting of giant pituitary adenomas (>3 cm), medial cavernous sinus wall resection, and high-flow intraoperative CSF leaks. Cases who utilized mucosal grafts had an overall shorter operating time (median: 183 min vs. 240 min; p < 0.001). Five postoperative CSF leaks were identified, and therefore, statistical analysis could not be performed for this complication. The effectiveness and morbidity of different sellar reconstruction techniques are comparable. Vascularized flaps were utilized more frequently in the setting of larger tumors and high-flow intraoperative CSF leaks.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38884280
doi: 10.1002/alr.23382
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 ARS‐AAOA, LLC.

Références

Hadad G, Bassagasteguy L, Carrau RL, et al. A novel reconstructive technique after endoscopic expanded endonasal approaches: vascular pedicle nasoseptal flap. Laryngoscope. 2006;116(10):1882‐1886.
Daraei P, Oyesiku NM, Patel ZM. The nasal floor pedicled flap: a novel technique for use in skull base reconstruction. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2014.
de Almeida JR, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA, et al. Nasal morbidity following endoscopic skull base surgery: a prospective cohort study. Head Neck. 2011;33(4):547‐551.
Lavigne P, Faden D, Wang E, Snyderman C. Complications of nasoseptal flap reconstruction: a systematic review. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2018;79(04):S291‐S299.
Rowan NR, Valappil B, Chen J, et al. Prospective characterization of postoperative nasal deformities in patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull‐base surgery. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2020.
Rowan N, Wang E, Gardner P, Fernandez‐Miranda J, Snyderman C. Nasal deformities following nasoseptal flap reconstruction of skull base defects. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2016;77:14‐18.
Soudry E, Psaltis AJ, Lee KH, Vaezafshar R, Nayak JV, Hwang PH. Complications associated with the pedicled nasoseptal flap for skull base reconstruction. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(1):80‐85.
Wengier A, Ram Z, Warshavsky A, Margalit N, Fliss DM, Abergel A. Endoscopic skull base reconstruction with the nasoseptal flap: complications and risk factors. Eur Arch Oto‐Rhino‐Laryngol. 2019;276:2491‐2498.
Kasemsiri P, Prevedello DMS, Otto BA, et al. Endoscopic endonasal technique: treatment of paranasal and anterior skull base malignancies. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;79:760‐779.
Nayak JV, Rathor A, Grayson JW, et al. Porcine small intestine submucosal grafts improve remucosalization and progenitor cell recruitment to sites of upper airway tissue remodeling. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2018.
Strober WA, Valappil B, Snyderman CH. Impact of reverse septal flap on morbidity of nasoseptal flap reconstruction of skull base defects. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2023;37:470‐475.
Caicedo‐Granados E, Carrau R, Snyderman CH, et al. Reverse rotation flap for reconstruction of donor site after vascular pedicled nasoseptal flap in skull base surgery.Laryngoscope. 2010;120(8):1550‐1552.
Pinheiro‐Neto C, Rowan NR, C MP, et al. Optimizing quality of life and minimizing morbidity through nasal preservation in endoscopic skull base surgery: a contemporary review. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2022;83(06):602‐610.
Saraswathula A, Porras JL, Mukherjee D, Rowan NR. Quality of life considerations in endoscopic endonasal management of anterior cranial base tumors. Cancers. 2022;15(1):195.
Bhenswala PN, Schlosser RJ, Nguyen SA, et al. Sinonasal quality‐of‐life outcomes after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2019.
Shukla A, Ahmed OG, Orlov CP, et al. Quality‐of‐life instruments in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery—a practical systematic review. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2021.
Hura N, Orlov CP, Khalafallah AM, et al. Impact of routine endoscopic skull base surgery on subjective olfaction and gustation outcomes. Operat Neurosurg. 2021;21(3):137‐142.
Scagnelli RJ, Patel V, Peris‐Celda M, Kenning TJ, Pinheiro‐Neto CD. Implementation of free mucosal graft technique for sellar reconstruction after pituitary surgery: outcomes of 158 consecutive patients. World Neurosurg. 2019;122:e506‐e511.
Peris‐Celda M, Chaskes M, Lee DD, Kenning TJ, Pinheiro‐Neto CD. Optimizing sellar reconstruction after pituitary surgery with free mucosal graft: results from the first 50 consecutive patients. World Neurosurg. 2017;101:180‐185.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata‐driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377‐381.
Hopkins C, Gillett S, Slack R, Lund VJ, Browne JP. Psychometric validity of the 22‐item Sinonasal Outcome Test. Clin Otolaryngol. 2009;34(5):447‐454.
Bowen AJ, Eltahir A, Goates AJ, et al. The posterior septal nasal floor mucosal flap for cranial base reconstruction. Laryngoscope. 2022;132(8):1561‐1568.
Paluzzi A, Fernandez‐Miranda JC, Tonya Stefko S, Challinor S, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA. Endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenomas: a series of 555 patients. Pituitary. 2014;17:307‐319.
Dehdashti AR, Ganna A, Karabatsou K, et al. Pure endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenomas: early surgical results in 200 patients and comparison with previous microsurgical series. Neurosurgery. 2008;62(5):1006‐1017.
Jang JH, Kim KH, Lee YM, Kim JS, Kim YZ. Surgical results of pure endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery for 331 pituitary adenomas: a 15‐year experience from a single institution. World Neurosurg. 2016;96:545‐555.
Gondim JA, Almeida JPC, Albuquerque LAF, et al. Endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenoma: surgical complications in 301 patients. Pituitary. 2011;14:174‐183.
Zhan R, Ma Z, Wang D, Li X. Pure endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach for nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas in the elderly: surgical outcomes and complications in 158 patients. World Neurosurg. 2015;84(6):1572‐1578.
Kuan EC, Yoo F, Patel PB, et al. An algorithm for sellar reconstruction following the endoscopic endonasal approach: a review of 300 consecutive cases. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2018;79(02):177‐183.
Wigand M. Transnasal ethmoidectomy under endoscopical control. Rhinology. 1981;19(1):7‐15.
Kimple AJ, Leight WD, Wheless SA, Zanation AM. Reducing nasal morbidity after skull base reconstruction with the nasoseptal flap: free middle turbinate mucosal grafts. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(9):1920‐1924.
Yoo F, Kuan E, Bergsneider M, Wang M. Free mucosal graft reconstruction of the septum after nasoseptal flap harvest: a novel technique using a posterior septal free mucosal graft. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2017;78(02):201‐206.
Suh JD, Ramakrishnan VR, DeConde AS. Nasal floor free mucosal graft for skull base reconstruction and cerebrospinal fluid leak repair. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2012;121(2):91‐95.
Chaskes MB, Barton B, Karsy M, et al. An algorithm for sellar reconstruction following endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma: a review of 582 cases. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. Wiley Online Library; 2022.
Curran K, Adepoju A, Pinheiro‐Neto C, et al. Nasal crust‐related morbidity and debridement after endoscopic skull base surgery. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023;27:336‐341.
Jalessi M, Jahanbakhshi A, Amini E, Kamrava SK, Farhadi M. Impact of nasoseptal flap elevation on sinonasal quality of life in endoscopic endonasal approach to pituitary adenomas. Eur Arch Oto‐Rhino‐Laryngol. 2016;273:1199‐1205.
Sarris CE, Little AS, Kshettry VR, et al. Assessment of the validity of the sinonasal outcomes test‐22 in pituitary surgery: a multicenter prospective trial. Laryngoscope. 2021;131(11):E2757‐E2763.
Gravbrot N, Kelly DF, Milligan J, et al. The minimal clinically important difference of the anterior Skull Base nasal Inventory‐12. Neurosurgery. 2018;83(2):277‐280.
Little AS, Jahnke H, Nakaji P, Milligan J, Chapple K, White WL. The anterior skull base nasal inventory (ASK nasal inventory): a clinical tool for evaluating rhinological outcomes after endonasal surgery for pituitary and cranial base lesions. Pituitary. 2012;15:513‐517.
Little AS, Kelly D, Milligan J, et al. Prospective validation of a patient‐reported nasal quality‐of‐life tool for endonasal skull base surgery: the Anterior Skull Base Nasal Inventory‐12. J Neurosurg. 2013;119(4):1068‐1074.

Auteurs

Hawa M Ali (HM)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Evelyn M Leland (EM)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Emily Stickney (E)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Christine M Lohse (CM)

Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Ehiremen Iyoha (E)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Benita Valappil (B)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Andrey Filimonov (A)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Kaitlin Goetschel (K)

Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Sarah C Young (SC)

Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Maryam N Shahin (MN)

Department of Neurological Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Olabisi Sanusi (O)

Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Davaine Joel Ndongo Sonfack (DJN)

Department of Neurosurgery, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Sylvie Nadeau (S)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Pierre-Olivier Champagne (PO)

Department of Neurosurgery, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Mathew Geltzeiler (M)

Department of Neurological Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Nathan T Zwagerman (NT)

Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Paul A Gardner (PA)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Eric W Wang (EW)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Georgios A Zenonos (GA)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Carl Snyderman (C)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Jamie Van Gompel (J)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Michael Link (M)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Maria Peris-Celda (M)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Janalee Stokken (J)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Garret Choby (G)

Department of Otolaryngology and Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Carlos D Pinheiro-Neto (CD)

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Classifications MeSH