Krishnakumar Asha, Ghadiyaram Ashwin, Murthy Akshay K, Opalak Charles F, Schuman Theodore A, Broaddus William C
School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, United States.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States.
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2024 Jul 23;86(4):419-428. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1788582. eCollection 2025 Aug.
In recent years, the transnasal endoscopic method for transsphenoidal pituitary tumor resection (eTSR), alongside the conventional sublabial microscopic transsphenoidal resection (mTSR) method, has gained popularity due to advancements in imaging and instrumentation. The current study sought to elucidate whether the trend toward eTSR was associated with changes in clinical outcomes at a single institution's multidisciplinary pituitary surgery program. The Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Brain Tumor Database was queried for patients who underwent either transnasal or sublabial pituitary tumor resection of pituitary tumors between 2009 and 2021. Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. Surgical outcomes like estimated blood loss (EBL), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and extent of resection were studied. A total of 93 patients (57 mTSR, 36 eTSR) underwent review, revealing that mTSR was associated with a higher average intraoperative blood loss (310.5 ± 48.6 mL) than eTSR (160.0 ± 30.7 mL; = 0.012). eTSR demonstrated an elevated intraoperative CSF leak incidence (36.1 vs. 15.8%; = 0.043), but no difference in postoperative CSF leak requiring intervention. Hospital LOS and extent of resection showed no significant differences between the approaches. This single-institution, retrospective study suggests that, in experienced hands, both eTSR and mTSR approaches are effective with comparable risk profiles. The approach may be best determined by the surgical team's evaluation of the tumor's imaging features, paying attention to the patient's preoperative hematologic status due to the greater propensity for blood loss with the microscopic approach.
近年来,经鼻内镜经蝶窦垂体瘤切除术(eTSR)与传统的经唇下显微镜下经蝶窦切除术(mTSR)方法一样,由于成像和器械的进步而受到欢迎。本研究旨在阐明在单一机构的多学科垂体手术项目中,eTSR的趋势是否与临床结果的变化相关。
对弗吉尼亚联邦大学(VCU)脑肿瘤数据库进行查询,以获取2009年至2021年间接受经鼻或经唇下垂体瘤切除术的患者。
比较两组的临床结果。
研究了手术结果,如估计失血量(EBL)、脑脊液(CSF)漏率、住院时间(LOS)和切除范围。
共有93例患者(57例mTSR,36例eTSR)接受了回顾,结果显示mTSR的平均术中失血量(310.5±48.6 mL)高于eTSR(160.0±30.7 mL;P = 0.012)。eTSR的术中脑脊液漏发生率较高(36.1%对15.8%;P = 0.043),但术后需要干预的脑脊液漏无差异。两种方法在住院时间和切除范围方面无显著差异。
这项单机构回顾性研究表明,在经验丰富的医生手中,eTSR和mTSR方法都是有效的,风险特征相当。最佳方法可能由手术团队对肿瘤影像学特征的评估来决定,由于显微镜手术方法失血倾向更大,因此要关注患者的术前血液学状况。