Irving R M, Jackler R K, Pitts L H
Department of Otolaryngology, University of California at San Francisco, 94117, USA.
J Neurosurg. 1998 May;88(5):840-5. doi: 10.3171/jns.1998.88.5.0840.
The goal of this retrospective study was to evaluate hearing preservation after surgery for vestibular schwannoma in which the middle fossa (MF) or retrosigmoid (RS) approaches were used. Hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma surgery can be achieved by using either the MR or RS approach. Comparative outcome data between these approaches are lacking, and, as a result, selection has generally been determined by the surgeon's preference.
The authors have compared removal of small vestibular schwannomas via MF and RS approaches with regard to hearing preservation and facial nerve function. The study group was composed of consecutively treated patients with vestibular schwannoma, 48 of whom underwent operation via an MF approach and 50 of whom underwent the same number of RS operations. Tumors were divided into size-matched groups. Hearing results were recorded according to the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery criteria, and facial nerve outcome was recorded as the House-Brackmann grade. Overall, 26 (52%) of the patients treated via the MF approach achieved a Class B or better hearing result compared with seven (14%) of the RS group. Some hearing was preserved in 32 (64%) of the patients in the MF group and in 17 (34%) of the RS group. The results obtained by using the MF approach were superior for intracanalicular tumors (p=0.009, t-test), and for tumors with a cerebellopontine angle (CPA) component measuring 0.1 to 1 cm (p=0.006, t-test). For tumors in the CPA that were 1.1 to 2 cm in size, our data were inconclusive because of the small sample size. Facial weakness was seen more frequently after MF surgery in the early postoperative period, but results were equal at 1 year.
The results of this study have demonstrated a more favorable hearing outcome for patients with intracanalicular tumors and tumors extending up to 1 cm into the CPA that were removed via the MF when compared with the RS approach.
本回顾性研究的目的是评估采用中颅窝(MF)或乙状窦后(RS)入路进行前庭神经鞘瘤手术后的听力保留情况。在前庭神经鞘瘤手术中,使用MF或RS入路均可实现听力保留。目前缺乏这两种入路的对比结果数据,因此,手术方式的选择通常取决于外科医生的偏好。
作者比较了通过MF和RS入路切除小型前庭神经鞘瘤后的听力保留情况和面神经功能。研究组由连续接受治疗的前庭神经鞘瘤患者组成,其中48例通过MF入路进行手术,50例通过RS入路进行相同数量的手术。肿瘤被分为大小匹配的组。根据美国耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学会标准记录听力结果,面神经结果记录为House-Brackmann分级。总体而言,通过MF入路治疗的患者中有26例(52%)获得了B级或更好的听力结果,而RS组为7例(14%)。MF组有32例(64%)患者保留了部分听力,RS组为17例(34%)。对于内听道肿瘤(p=0.009,t检验)以及桥小脑角(CPA)部分大小为0.1至1 cm的肿瘤,采用MF入路获得的结果更优(p=0.006,t检验)。对于CPA中大小为1.1至2 cm的肿瘤,由于样本量小,我们的数据尚无定论。MF手术后早期面神经麻痹更为常见,但1年后结果相当。
本研究结果表明,与RS入路相比,通过MF入路切除内听道肿瘤以及延伸至CPA达1 cm的肿瘤时,患者的听力结果更佳。