Suppr超能文献

巨大及不规则垂体神经内分泌肿瘤手术:单中心同期联合鼻内镜经鼻与经颅手术及单纯鼻内镜经鼻手术的比较

Giant and irregular pituitary neuroendocrine tumors surgery: comparison of simultaneous combined endoscopic endonasal and transcranial and purely endoscopic endonasal surgery at a single center.

作者信息

Fu Jun, Luo Wenwei, Zhang Chunlin, Wang Zhicheng, Fan Wenjian, Lin Yuanxiang, Kang Dezhi, Song Jianping, Jiang Changzhen, Yan Xiaorong

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery Research Institute, The First Affiliated Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350005, China.

Department of Neurosurgery, National Regional Medical Center, Binhai Campus of the First Affiliated Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350212, China.

出版信息

Chin Neurosurg J. 2025 Feb 3;11(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s41016-025-00389-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of giant and irregular pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (GIPitNETs) presents a significant challenge in neurosurgery. While endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) is a widely used approach for PitNETs, GIPitNETs with extensive intracranial extension pose challenges for purely EES. We use simultaneous combined endoscopic endonasal and transcranial surgery (CECS) for the treatment of this type of tumor. Currently, there is limited research comparing CECS to EES for GIPitNETs. This study aims to compare the efficacy and short outcome of CECS and purely EES in the management of GIPitNETs to better understand the advantages and limitations of each surgical approach.

METHODS

The data of GIPitNETs patients who underwent surgery between March 2018 and May 2023 at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. All included cases were divided into CECS and EES groups according to the treatment modality received. The baseline characteristics and tumor imaging features of patients were compared between the groups, as well as surgical results, perioperative complications, and last follow-up outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 27 undergoing CECS and 23 EES. CECS achieved a significantly higher GTR rate compared to EES (66.7% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.0001). CECS had longer operation times and hospital stays, but both approaches had similar rates of complications, including intracranial infection, CSF leakage, new pituitary dysfunction, postoperative diabetes insipidus, and vascular infarction. CECS reduces the risk of postoperative bleeding. Tumor recurrence and reoperation were significantly more common in the EES group.

CONCLUSIONS

CECS is a safe and effective surgical approach for GIPitNETs, leading to higher rates of GTR, comparable complication rates, and reduced risk of postoperative bleeding when compared to purely EES. EES was associated with more tumor recurrence. Further long-term follow-up data is needed to validate these findings.

摘要

背景

巨大且不规则的垂体神经内分泌肿瘤(GIPitNETs)的外科治疗是神经外科的一项重大挑战。虽然内镜鼻内手术(EES)是垂体神经内分泌肿瘤广泛采用的方法,但具有广泛颅内延伸的GIPitNETs对单纯的EES构成挑战。我们采用内镜鼻内与经颅联合手术(CECS)治疗这类肿瘤。目前,比较CECS与EES治疗GIPitNETs的研究有限。本研究旨在比较CECS与单纯EES治疗GIPitNETs的疗效和短期结果,以更好地了解每种手术方法的优缺点。

方法

回顾性分析2018年3月至2023年5月在单一中心接受手术的GIPitNETs患者的数据。所有纳入病例根据接受的治疗方式分为CECS组和EES组。比较两组患者的基线特征、肿瘤影像学特征、手术结果、围手术期并发症及末次随访结果。

结果

共有50例患者符合纳入标准,其中27例行CECS,23例行EES。与EES相比,CECS的全切除率显著更高(66.7%对13.0%,p<0.0001)。CECS的手术时间和住院时间更长,但两种方法的并发症发生率相似,包括颅内感染、脑脊液漏、新的垂体功能障碍、术后尿崩症和血管梗死。CECS降低了术后出血的风险。EES组肿瘤复发和再次手术明显更常见。

结论

CECS是治疗GIPitNETs的一种安全有效的手术方法,与单纯EES相比,全切除率更高,并发症发生率相当,术后出血风险降低。EES与更多的肿瘤复发相关。需要进一步的长期随访数据来验证这些发现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6139/11789305/c116a200184d/41016_2025_389_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验