Avery Michael B, Mallari Regin Jay, Barkhoudarian Garni, Kelly Daniel F
1Pacific Neuroscience Institute, Santa Monica, California; and.
2Saint John's Cancer Institute, Providence Saint John's Health Center, Santa Monica, California.
J Neurosurg. 2021 Oct 29;136(5):1314-1324. doi: 10.3171/2021.6.JNS21759. Print 2022 May 1.
The authors' objective was to compare the indications, outcomes, and anatomical limits of supraorbital (SO) and mini-pterional (MP) craniotomies in patients with intra- and extraaxial brain tumors, and to assess approach selection, utility of endoscopy, and surgical field overlap.
A retrospective analysis was conducted of all brain tumor patients who underwent an SO or MP approach. The analyzed characteristics included pathology, endoscopy use, extent of resection, length of stay (LOS), and complications. On the basis of preoperative MRI data, tumor heatmaps were constructed to compare surgical access provided by both routes, including coronal projection heatmaps for parasellar tumors.
From 2007 to 2020, 158 patients underwent 173 (84.8%) SO craniotomies and 30 patients underwent 31 (15.2%) MP craniotomies; 71 (34.8%) procedures were reoperations. Of these 204 operations, 110 (63.6%) SO and 21 (67.7%) MP approaches were for extraaxial tumors (meningiomas in 65% and 76.2%, respectively). Gliomas and metastases together represented 84.1% and 70% of intraaxial tumors accessed with SO and MP approaches, respectively. Overall, 56.1% of tumors accessed with the SO approach and 41.9% of those accessed with the MP approach were in the parasellar region. Axial projection heatmaps showed that SO access extended along the entire ipsilateral and medial contralateral anterior cranial fossa, parasellar region, ipsilateral sylvian fissure, medial middle cranial fossa, and anterior midbrain, whereas MP access was limited to the ipsilateral middle cranial fossa, sylvian fissure, lateral parasellar region, and posterior aspect of anterior cranial fossa. Coronal projection heatmaps showed that parasellar access extended further superiorly with the SO approach compared with that of the MP approach. Endoscopy was utilized in 98 (56.6%) SO craniotomies and 7 (22.6%) MP craniotomies, with further tumor resection in 48 (49%) and 5 (71.4%) cases, respectively. Endoscope-assisted tumor removal was clustered in areas that were generally at farther distances from the craniotomy or in angled locations such as the cribriform plate region where microscopic visualization is limited. Gross-total or near-total resection was achieved in 120/173 (69%) SO approaches and 21/31 (68%) MP approaches. Major complications occurred in 11 (6.4%) SO approaches and 1 (3.2%) MP approach (p = 0.49). The median LOS decreased to 2 days in the last 2 years of the study.
This clinical experience suggests the SO and MP craniotomies are versatile, safe, and complementary approaches for tumors located in the anterior and middle cranial fossae and perisylvian and parasellar regions. The SO route, used in 85% of cases, achieved greater overall reach than the MP route. Both approaches may benefit from expanded visualization with endoscopy.
作者的目的是比较眶上(SO)开颅术和翼点微骨瓣(MP)开颅术在轴内和轴外脑肿瘤患者中的适应症、手术结果和解剖学界限,并评估手术入路的选择、内镜的效用以及手术视野重叠情况。
对所有接受SO或MP入路的脑肿瘤患者进行回顾性分析。分析的特征包括病理、内镜使用情况、切除范围、住院时间(LOS)和并发症。基于术前MRI数据,构建肿瘤热图以比较两种入路提供的手术通道,包括鞍旁肿瘤的冠状位投影热图。
2007年至2020年,158例患者接受了173次(84.8%)SO开颅术,30例患者接受了31次(15.2%)MP开颅术;71次(34.8%)手术为再次手术。在这204例手术中,110次(63.6%)SO入路和21次(67.7%)MP入路用于轴外肿瘤(分别占65%和76.2%的脑膜瘤)。胶质瘤和转移瘤分别占通过SO和MP入路治疗的轴内肿瘤的84.1%和70%。总体而言,56.1%通过SO入路治疗的肿瘤和41.9%通过MP入路治疗的肿瘤位于鞍旁区域。轴位投影热图显示,SO入路可延伸至同侧和对侧前颅窝内侧的整个区域、鞍旁区域、同侧外侧裂、中颅窝内侧和中脑前部,而MP入路仅限于同侧中颅窝、外侧裂、鞍旁外侧区域和前颅窝后部。冠状位投影热图显示,与MP入路相比,SO入路的鞍旁区域入路在上方延伸得更远。98例(56.6%)SO开颅术和7例(22.6%)MP开颅术使用了内镜,分别有48例(49%)和5例(71.4%)病例通过内镜辅助进一步切除了肿瘤。内镜辅助肿瘤切除集中在通常距离开颅术较远的区域或角度位置,如显微镜视野受限的筛板区域。120/173次(69%)SO入路和21/31次(68%)MP入路实现了大体全切或近全切。11次(6.4%)SO入路和1次(3.2%)MP入路发生了严重并发症(p = 0.49)。在研究的最后2年,中位住院时间降至2天。
该临床经验表明,SO和MP开颅术是用于治疗位于前颅窝和中颅窝以及外侧裂和鞍旁区域肿瘤的通用、安全且互补的手术入路。在85%的病例中使用的SO入路比MP入路的总体可达范围更大。两种入路都可能受益于内镜扩大的视野。