Choby Garret W, Mattos Jose L, Hughes Marion A, Fernandez-Miranda Juan C, Gardner Paul A, Snyderman Carl H, Wang Eric W
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Feb;152(2):255-9. doi: 10.1177/0194599814561431. Epub 2014 Dec 4.
To assess delayed nasoseptal flaps as a viable reconstructive option for sellar defects, evaluate postoperative vascularity of delayed nasoseptal flaps, and compare cerebrospinal fluid leak and surgery-specific complication rates of primary to delayed nasoseptal flaps.
Case series with chart review.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
All patients undergoing transsellar approaches for skull base tumors from 2009 to 2013 were evaluated. In cases where the necessity of a vascularized reconstructive flap was made evident only after tumor resection, the nasoseptal flap was raised after tumor resection and/or cerebrospinal fluid leak development, thus constituting a delayed nasoseptal flap. Outcome measures include postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, cerebrospinal leak rates, and complication rates.
During this timeframe, 437 patients underwent transsellar approaches. Primary nasoseptal flaps were used to reconstruct 179 patients while 32 patients had delayed flaps. All available postoperative MRI scans of delayed nasoseptal flap patients maintained vascularity on examination of T1 postcontrast images. There was no significant difference in cerebrospinal fluid leak rate between primary (3.4%) and delayed flaps (3.1%) (P = .95). There was no significant difference in surgery-specific complication rates between primary flaps (10.6%) and delayed flaps (3.1%; P = .14). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated no significant effect of flap type, age, or sex on cerebrospinal fluid leak rates.
Delayed nasoseptal flaps are a viable reconstructive option for sellar skull base defects. They maintain vascularity as evidenced on postoperative MRI and are comparable to primary nasoseptal flaps with regard to cerebrospinal fluid leak rates and complication rates.
评估延迟鼻中隔瓣作为鞍区缺损可行的重建选择,评估延迟鼻中隔瓣术后的血管化情况,并比较一期与延迟鼻中隔瓣的脑脊液漏及手术相关并发症发生率。
病例系列研究并进行图表回顾。
匹兹堡大学医学中心。
对2009年至2013年期间所有接受经鞍区入路治疗颅底肿瘤的患者进行评估。在仅在肿瘤切除后才明确需要血管化重建瓣的情况下,在肿瘤切除和/或脑脊液漏发生后掀起鼻中隔瓣,从而构成延迟鼻中隔瓣。观察指标包括术后磁共振成像(MRI)结果、脑脊液漏发生率和并发症发生率。
在此期间,437例患者接受了经鞍区入路手术。179例患者使用一期鼻中隔瓣进行重建,32例患者使用延迟鼻中隔瓣。对所有延迟鼻中隔瓣患者术后可获得的MRI扫描进行T1增强图像检查时,均显示血管化良好。一期鼻中隔瓣(3.4%)和延迟鼻中隔瓣(3.1%)的脑脊液漏发生率无显著差异(P = 0.95)。一期鼻中隔瓣(10.6%)和延迟鼻中隔瓣(3.1%)的手术相关并发症发生率无显著差异(P = 0.14)。逻辑回归分析表明,瓣类型、年龄或性别对脑脊液漏发生率无显著影响。
延迟鼻中隔瓣是鞍区颅底缺损可行的重建选择。术后MRI显示其保持血管化,在脑脊液漏发生率和并发症发生率方面与一期鼻中隔瓣相当。