Phogat Vivek, Agarwal Manish, Sinha Virendra D, Purohit Devendra
Department of Neurosurgery, Sawai Man Singh Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2021 Jul;82(Suppl 3):e88-e93. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-3402041. Epub 2020 Feb 3.
This study was aimed to compare comparative efficacy of transsphenoidal endonasal endoscopic and microscopic pituitary surgery at single center of a developing country. This study included 198 patients in which 50 patients were studied prospectively and 148 patients were studied retrospectively, diagnosed with pituitary adenoma who presented to neurosurgery department at Sawai Man Singh hospital in Jaipur, India, and were operated via transsphenoidal route between 2013 and 2018. Patients' records were reviewed and relevant clinical and surgical data were collected. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical procedure performed, endoscopic endonasal transsphenoid approach (group 1) and microscopic transsphenoidal approach (group 2). Outcomes, in terms of efficacy and the resulting complications of each procedure were compared and analyzed. A total of 198 patients with pituitary adenoma were operated during the study period. Among them, 119 (60.1%) patients were operated by endoscopic and 79 (39.9%) patients were operated by microscopic transsphenoidal approach. In endoscopic group, intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak was present in 39 patients (32.77%) and 23 (29.11%) in microscopic group. Complete tumor removal was achieved in 69.75% in endoscopic and 48.13% in microscopic group ( = 0.004). Endocrine control was achieved in 78.94% (30 out of 38) in endoscopic and 68.18% (15 out of 22 patients) in microscopic group. The transsphenoidal approaches for resection of pituitary adenoma, both endoscopic and microscopic approach, are minimally invasive and effective for disease control. Both the approaches lead to similar endocrine control, visual symptoms, complications, and long-term outcome. Therefore, the selection of the final approach should be individualized, ultimately depending on the surgeons' comfort, experience, and familiarity with the particular technique.
本研究旨在比较在一个发展中国家的单一中心进行经蝶窦鼻内镜和显微镜下垂体手术的相对疗效。本研究纳入了198例患者,其中50例患者进行前瞻性研究,148例患者进行回顾性研究,这些患者均被诊断为垂体腺瘤,在印度斋浦尔的萨瓦伊·曼·辛格医院神经外科就诊,并于2013年至2018年期间通过经蝶窦途径进行手术。回顾患者记录并收集相关临床和手术数据。根据所采用的手术方式,将患者分为两组,即鼻内镜经鼻蝶入路组(第1组)和显微镜下经蝶入路组(第2组)。比较并分析了每种手术方式的疗效和由此产生的并发症。在研究期间,共有198例垂体腺瘤患者接受了手术。其中,119例(60.1%)患者接受了鼻内镜手术,79例(39.9%)患者接受了显微镜下经蝶手术。鼻内镜组术中脑脊液漏的发生率为39例(32.77%),显微镜组为23例(29.11%)。鼻内镜组肿瘤完全切除率为69.75%,显微镜组为48.13%(P = 0.004)。鼻内镜组内分泌控制率为78.94%(38例中的30例),显微镜组为68.18%(22例中的15例)。经蝶窦入路切除垂体腺瘤,无论是鼻内镜还是显微镜入路,均为微创手术且对疾病控制有效。两种入路在内分泌控制、视觉症状、并发症及长期预后方面相似。因此,最终手术方式的选择应个体化,最终取决于外科医生的舒适度、经验以及对特定技术的熟悉程度。