Maxfield Alice Z, Mueller Sarina K, Raquib Aaishah R, Sedaghat Ahmad R, Bergmark Regan W, Metson Ralph B, Holbrook Eric H, Bleier Benjamin S, Gray Stacey T
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA.
Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA.
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2020 Jun 8;5(3):375-380. doi: 10.1002/lio2.412. eCollection 2020 Jun.
Repair of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks of the lateral recess of the sphenoid (LRS) sinus can be challenging to accomplish via an endoscopic transphenoidal approach. The endoscopic transpterygoid approach can improve surgical access to the lateral recess but requires more extensive surgical dissection. We review our experience with LRS CSF leak repair via both techniques to determine whether preoperative radiologic data can help predict the most appropriate surgical approach.
Electronic medical records of patients with LRS CSF leaks were retrospectively reviewed at a single tertiary referral center. Radiographic measurements from preoperative computed tomography images were reviewed.
Twenty-two LRS CSF leaks were identified. The transphenoidal and transpterygoid approach were used in 6 (27.3%) and 16 (72.7%) cases, respectively.The mean vidian canal to foramen rotundum angle of the repairs accessed transphenoidally as compared to the transptyergoid approach were not significantly different (41.93° ±10.91, 40.72° ±19.49, respectively; .63). However, the mean volume of the LRS accessed by the transpterygoid approach was significantly greater compared to those accessed through the transphenoidal approach (0.97 cm ± 0.48, 0.39 cm ± 0.40, respectively; .04). A LRS volume of 0.400 cm or greater predicted the use of the transpterygoid approach with 93.3% sensitivity and 60.0% specificity.
This study demonstrated that LRS CSF leaks that necessitated repair by the transpterygoid approach, rather than transphenoidal approach, were in the context of significantly larger lateral recess. Assessment of the LRS volume is a quantifiable parameter to aid in preoperative surgical planning.
Level 4.
通过内镜经蝶窦入路修复蝶窦外侧隐窝(LRS)的脑脊液(CSF)漏可能具有挑战性。内镜经翼突入路可改善对外侧隐窝的手术入路,但需要更广泛的手术解剖。我们回顾了我们通过这两种技术修复LRS脑脊液漏的经验,以确定术前影像学数据是否有助于预测最合适的手术入路。
在一个单一的三级转诊中心对LRS脑脊液漏患者的电子病历进行回顾性研究。对术前计算机断层扫描图像的影像学测量进行了评估。
共识别出22例LRS脑脊液漏。分别有6例(27.3%)和16例(72.7%)采用了经蝶窦和经翼突入路。与经翼突入路相比,经蝶窦入路修复的平均翼管至圆孔角度无显著差异(分别为41.93°±10.91和40.72°±19.49;P = 0.63)。然而,与经蝶窦入路相比,经翼突入路的LRS平均容积显著更大(分别为0.97 cm³±0.48和0.39 cm³±0.40;P = 0.04)。LRS容积≥0.400 cm³预测采用经翼突入路的敏感度为93.3%,特异度为60.0%。
本研究表明,需要经翼突入路而非经蝶窦入路修复的LRS脑脊液漏与显著更大的外侧隐窝有关。LRS容积评估是有助于术前手术规划的一个可量化参数。
4级。