Departments of1Neurological Surgery and.
2Otorhinolaryngology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York; and.
J Neurosurg. 2019 Feb 1;130(2):337-346. doi: 10.3171/2018.10.JNS182154.
OBJECTIVEEndoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) is a relatively recent addition to the neurosurgical armamentarium. As with many new approaches, there has been significant controversy regarding its value compared with more traditional approaches to ventral skull base pathology. Although early enthusiasm for new approaches that appear less invasive is usually high, these new techniques require rigorous study to ensure that widespread implementation is in the best interest of patients.METHODSThe authors compared surgical results for ESBS with transcranial surgery (TCS) for several different pathologies over two different time periods (prior to 2012 and 2012-2017) to see how results have evolved over time. Pathologies examined were craniopharyngioma, anterior skull base meningioma, esthesioneuroblastoma, chordoma, and chondrosarcoma.RESULTSESBS offers clear advantages over TCS for most craniopharyngiomas and chordomas. For well-selected cases of planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae meningiomas, ESBS has similar rates of resection with higher rates of visual improvement, and more recent results with lower CSF leaks make the complication rates similar between the two approaches. TCS offers a higher rate of resection with fewer complications for olfactory groove meningiomas. ESBS is preferred for lower-grade esthesioneuroblastomas, but higher-grade tumors often still require a craniofacial approach. There are few data on chondrosarcomas, but early results show that ESBS appears to offer clear advantages for minimizing morbidity with similar rates of resection, as long as surgeons are familiar with more complex inferolateral approaches.CONCLUSIONSESBS is maturing into a well-established approach that is clearly in the patients' best interest when applied by experienced surgeons for appropriate pathology. Ongoing critical reevaluation of outcomes is essential for ensuring optimal results.
目的
内镜颅底手术 (ESBS) 是神经外科领域的一项相对较新的技术。与许多新方法一样,与传统的颅底前病变治疗方法相比,其价值存在很大争议。虽然人们对新的微创方法早期充满热情,但这些新技术需要严格的研究,以确保广泛应用符合患者的最佳利益。
方法
作者比较了 ESBS 与经颅手术 (TCS) 治疗几种不同病变的手术结果,比较了两个不同时间段(2012 年之前和 2012-2017 年)的手术结果,以观察结果随时间的演变。检查的病变包括颅咽管瘤、前颅底脑膜瘤、嗅神经母细胞瘤、脊索瘤和软骨肉瘤。
结果
ESBS 对于大多数颅咽管瘤和脊索瘤明显优于 TCS。对于选择良好的蝶骨平台和鞍结节脑膜瘤病例,ESBS 具有相似的切除率,更高的视力改善率,最近的结果显示脑脊液漏发生率较低,使两种方法的并发症发生率相似。TCS 为嗅沟脑膜瘤提供了更高的切除率和较少的并发症。ESBS 是低度嗅神经母细胞瘤的首选方法,但高度肿瘤通常仍需要颅面入路。软骨肉瘤的数据很少,但早期结果表明,只要外科医生熟悉更复杂的下外侧入路,ESBS 似乎可以通过最小化发病率来提供明显的优势,同时保持相似的切除率。
结论
ESBS 是一种成熟的方法,当由经验丰富的外科医生为适当的病变应用时,显然符合患者的最佳利益。对结果进行持续的批判性评估对于确保最佳结果至关重要。