Department of Neurological Surgery, Pauline Braathen Neurological Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL, USA.
Department of Neurosurgery, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Jul 16;47(1):334. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-02554-2.
The past two decades have witnessed the rise of keyhole microscopic minimally invasive surgeries, including the transciliary supraorbital approach (TCA) and transpalpebral approach (TPA), commonly known as the transorbital approach. This study aims to elucidate the nuances, specific indications, and advantages of each approach.
A series of dissections were conducted on five formalin-fixed, alcohol-preserved cadaver heads. The TCA was performed on one side, and the TPA on the other. Virtual measurements of working angles for both approaches were recorded. Additionally, three clinical cases were presented to illustrate the practical application of the techniques.
For TCA, the craniotomy dimensions were 1.7 cm x 2.5 cm (Cranial-Caudal (CC) x Lateral-Lateral (LL)), while for TPA, they measured 2.1 cm x 2.9 cm (CC x LL). The measurements of anterior clinoid processes (ACP) were obtained and compared between approaches. In the TCA, the mean ipsilateral ACP measurement was 62 mm (Range: 61 -63 mm), and the mean contralateral ACP measurement was 71.2 mm (Range: 70 -72 mm). In TPA, these measurements were 47.8 mm (Range: 47 -49 mm) and 62.8 mm (Range: 62 -64 mm), respectively. TCA exhibited an average cranial-caudal angle of 14.9°, while TPA demonstrated an average of 8.3°.
The anterior cranial fossa was better exposed by a TCA, which also featured shorter operative times, enhanced midline visualization, and a quicker learning curve. Conversely, the middle fossa was better exposed by a TPA, making it an excellent option for middle fossa pathologies, including those in the anterior temporal lobe. After sphenoid bone wing drilling, the TPA offers superior visualization from the lateral to the medial aspect and enhances the CC angle. Additionally, the TPA reduces the risk of postoperative frontalis palsy based on anatomic landmarks. However, the TPA requires a greater cranial osteotomy, and due to unfamiliarity with eyelid anatomy, the learning curve for most neurosurgeons is lengthier for this procedure.
在过去的二十年中,出现了几种关键性的微创显微镜手术,包括经眶上锁孔入路(TCA)和经皮入路(TPA),通常被称为经眶入路。本研究旨在阐明每种方法的细微差别、具体适应证和优势。
在五个福尔马林固定、酒精保存的头颅标本上进行了一系列解剖。一侧行 TCA,另一侧行 TPA。记录了两种方法的工作角度的虚拟测量值。此外,还介绍了三个临床病例,以说明这些技术的实际应用。
对于 TCA,骨瓣的尺寸为 1.7cm×2.5cm(颅尾(CC)×侧向侧向(LL)),而 TPA 的尺寸为 2.1cm×2.9cm(CC×LL)。测量了前床突(ACP)的尺寸,并比较了两种方法之间的差异。在 TCA 中,同侧 ACP 的平均测量值为 62mm(范围:61-63mm),对侧 ACP 的平均测量值为 71.2mm(范围:70-72mm)。在 TPA 中,这些值分别为 47.8mm(范围:47-49mm)和 62.8mm(范围:62-64mm)。TCA 显示出平均 14.9°的颅尾角,而 TPA 显示出平均 8.3°的颅尾角。
TCA 可更好地暴露前颅窝,手术时间更短,中线可视化增强,学习曲线更快。相反,TPA 可更好地暴露中颅窝,对于中颅窝病变,包括前颞叶病变,是一种很好的选择。在蝶骨翼钻孔后,TPA 从外侧到内侧提供了更好的可视化效果,并增加了 CC 角度。此外,根据解剖标志,TPA 降低了术后额神经瘫痪的风险。但是,TPA 需要更大的颅骨切开术,并且由于对眼睑解剖结构不熟悉,大多数神经外科医生的学习曲线更长。