User Tools

Site Tools


endoscopic_endonasal_approach

Endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA)

Endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery has dramatically changed and expanded over recent years due to significant advancements in instrumentation, techniques, and anatomic understanding. With these advances, the need for more robust skull base reconstructive techniques was vital 1)

Since 1995 there is a remarkable advancement in endonasal approach by endoscope. Refinements in camera definition, neurosurgical instruments, neuronavigation, and surgical technique.

Since 2000s, Endoscopic endonasal approach has become the most popular choice of neurosurgeons and otolaryngologists to treat lesions of the skull base, with minimal invasiveness, lower incidence of complications, and lower morbidity and mortality rates compared with traditional approaches.

The dual surgeon team, have facilitated purely endonasal endoscopic approaches to the majority of the midline skull base that were previously difficult to access through the transsphenoidal approach via microscope.

History

The history of the endoscope in skull base surgery is de facto the history of pituitary surgery. The first pituitary operation was likely performed by Sir Victor Horsley in 1889 via a transfrontal approach though he did not publish his results 2).

His compatriots, Caton and Paul, were the first to publish the results of this operation in 1893 3) in which they reported that their patient was cured of his headaches for the three months he survived post operatively.

But, it is Schloffer who is widely regarded as the father of modern pituitary surgery. In 1906 he published a seminal paper discussing the possibility of pituitary surgery via a transsphenoidal approach 4) and performed this operation on March 16, 1907. The operation was performed via nasal translocation and lasted about 75 min. Though there were no intraoperative complications, the patient died two months later and on autopsy was found to have hydrocephalus as a result of residual tumor blocking the foramen of Monro 5)

Then in 1910, Oskar Hirsh, an otolaryngologist, introduced a transseptal, transsphenoidal approach to the pituitary gland 6) an operation which is still in use today. Cushing performed his first pituitary operation in 1909 7) using Schloffer's method but then rapidly adopted Hirsh's approach adding a sublabial incision and a headlamp to improve visualization of the sella. Using this approach he performed 231 operations with a 5.6% mortality rate 8) 9).

Hirsch continued to perform transphenoidal hypophysectomy and by 1937 had performed the operation on 277 patients with a mortality rate of 5.4% 10). After being displaced from Austria by the Nazis shortly thereafter, he emigrated to the US and continued to operate at Massachusetts General Hospital in collaboration with a neurosurgeon, Hannibal Hamlin. The other surgeon who kept the technique alive was Norman Dott, a British neurosurgeon who learned the approach in 1923 from Cushing and by 1956 had performed 80 procedures with no deaths 11).

The modern advent of the transsphenoidal approach as the preferred approach to the pituitary began in 1956 when a French neurosurgeon, Gerard Guiot, learned the technique from Dott and brought it back to Paris and reintroduced it to skeptical colleagues. He ultimately performed over 1,000 transsphenoidal hypophysectomies and also introduced the use of intraoperative fluoroscopy 12) 13) 14).

A student of Giuot, Jules Hardy revolutionized the transsphenoidal pituitary approach when he introduced the use of the operating microscope and microsurgical instrumentation in 1967. The microscope with increased illumination and magnification permitted a more thorough and safer resection without deaths or major morbidities 15) 16).

Indeed, Hardy's contributions led to a paradigm shift in pituitary tumor surgery. Previously, the operation was performed to debulk large tumors off the optic apparatus, but now microsurgical techniques were introduced allowing for surgical cure of hormonal disease in microadenomas.

Although the procedure described by Hardy underwent numerous modifications (including extended approaches to other skull base sites: clival and suprasellar tumors as well as cavernous sinus lesions), it was the main procedure performed by neurosurgeons for removal of pituitary tumors from the 1960's through the early 1990's 17).

Types

Disadvantages

Potential disadvantages of this procedure include the relatively restricted working space and the danger of an inadequate dural repair with cerebrospinal fluid leakage and potential for meningitis resulting. These approaches often require a large opening of the dura mater over the tuberculum sellae and posterior planum sphenoidale, or retroclival space. In addition, they typically involve large intraoperative CSF leaks, which necessitate precise and effective dural closure 18).

Sinus opacity is still present after one year of advance endoscopic skull base surgery but symptoms seems to return to basal after 12months of follow-up 19).

Advantages

The major potential advantage of the endoscopic endonasal approach to the skull base is that it provides a direct anatomical route to the lesion without traversing any major neurovascular structures, obviating brain retraction. Many tumors grow in a medial-to-lateral direction, displacing structures laterally as they expand, creating natural corridors for their resection via an anteromedial approach.

Refinements in approach and closure techniques have reduced the risk of cerebrospinal fluid leak and infection. This has allowed surgeons to more aggressively treat a variety of pathologies. Now its a safe and effective procedure for various parasellar lesions. Selection of patients who are unlikely to develop complications seems to be an important factor for procedure efficacy and good outcome 20).

Indications

Endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEAs) constitute a reasonable option for the treatment of lesions that involve the sellar and clival regions.

The evolution of the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach, which was initially reserved only for sellar lesions through the sphenoidal sinus cavity, has lead in the last decades to a progressive possibility to access the skull base from the nose. This route allows midline access and visibility to the suprasellar, retrosellar and parasellar space while obviating brain retraction, and makes possible to treat transsphenoidally a variety of relatively small midline skull base and parasellar lesions traditionally approached transcranially.

In a cadaveric model, the piezoelectric endoscopic transsphenoidal craniotomy (PETC) is technically feasible. This technique allows the surgeon to create a bone flap in endoscopic transnasal approaches similar to existing standard transcranial craniotomies. Future trials will focus on skull base reconstruction using this bone flap 21).

Preserving normal sinonasal physiology by limiting middle turbinate resections, avoiding unnecessary maxillary antrostomies, and reducing the use of nasoseptal flaps when feasible results in less sinonasal morbidity and more rapid recovery during the postoperative period 22).

Pituitary surgery

Cerebral Aneurysm

Optic neuropathy

Based on the anatomic relationship between sinonasal complex and orbit, this approach could be a smart solution for approaching the medial orbital region.

These techniques should be considered a valid option for optic nerve decompression in cases of Graves ophthalmopathy and post-traumatic optic neuropathy as well as for addressing extraconal or intraconal lesions placed medially to the optic nerve course 23).

Four main pathologies with outcomes after treatment were identified for discussion: pituitary adenomas, craniopharyngiomas, anterior skull base meningiomas, and chordomas. Within all four of these tumor types, articles have demonstrated the efficacy, and in certain cases, the advantages over more traditional microscope-based techniques, of the endonasal endoscopic technique 24).

The endoscopic endonasal approach is a safe and effective procedure for the management of recurrent and/or regrowing pituitary tumors previously treated by either a microsurgical or an endoscopic approach 25).

see Endoscopic endonasal approach for intracranial aneurysm

Craniopharyngiomas

Anterior skull base meningiomas

Is feasible and safe for the complete resection of anterior skull base meningiomas with intra- and extracranial extension in one stage in selected cases.

Although the endonasal endoscopic approach has been applied to remove olfactory groove meningiomas, controversy exists regarding the efficacy and safety of this approach compared with more traditional transcranial approaches

Cavernous Sinus lesions.

Petrous apex Choleterol granulomas

The EEA is a safe and effective alternative to traditional open approaches to petrous apex CGs 26).

Cerebrospinal fluid leakage

Access to the intraorbital optic nerve segment

Nonvestibular schwannomas

Nonvestibular schwannomas of the skull base often represent a challenge owing to their anatomic location. With improved techniques in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery, resection of various ventral skull base tumors, including schwannomas, has become possible.

To assess the outcomes of using endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for nonvestibular schwannomas of the skull base.

Seventeen patients operated on for skull base schwannomas by EEA at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from 2003 to 2009 were reviewed.

Three patients underwent combined approaches with retromastoid craniectomy (n = 2) and orbitopterional craniotomy (n = 1). Three patients underwent multistage EEA. The rest received a single EEA operation. Data on degree of resection were found for 15 patients. Gross total resection (n = 9) and near-total (>90%) resection (n = 3) were achieved in 12 patients (80%). There were no tumor recurrences or postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leaks. In 3 of 7 patients with preoperative sensory deficits of trigeminal nerve distribution, there were partial improvements. Patients with preoperative reduced vision (n = 1) and cranial nerve VI or III palsies (n = 3) also showed improvement. Five patients had new postoperative trigeminal nerve deficits: 2 had sensory deficits only, 1 had motor deficit only, and 2 had both motor and sensory deficits. Three of these patients had partial improvement, but 3 developed corneal neurotrophic keratopathy.

An EEA provides adequate access for nonvestibular schwannomas invading the skull base, allowing a high degree of resection with a low rate of complications 27).

Technique

Supine position with the trunk raised 10º and the head in neutral position rotated 10º towards the surgeon. The head is secured in a Horseshoe Headrest without rigid three-pin fixation. The nose is prepared by placing pledgets soaked with 0.02% of Oxymetazoline into each nostril, followed by Povidone Iodine solution applied over the nose and upper lip as well as into the nares with cotton tip applicators.

Pediatric population

Endonasal endoscopic skull base approaches are viable in the pediatric population, they are not impeded by sphenoid sinus aeration, and they have minimal risk of cerebrospinal fluid leak and meningitis. Outcomes and complications can be predicted based on specific radio anatomical skull base measurements rather than age 28).

Challenges

One challenge performing endoscopic endonasal approaches is the surgical conflict that occurs between the surgical instruments and endoscope in the crowded nasal corridor. This conflict decreases surgical freedom, increases surgeon frustration, and lengthens the learning curve for trainees.

The application of a malleable endoscope to transsphenoidal approaches to the parasellar region decreases instrument-endoscope conflict and improves surgical freedom 29).

Endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) of the skull base often requires extensive bone work in proximity to critical neurovascular structures.

In selected EES, the ultrasonic bone curette was successfully used to remove loose pieces of bone in narrow corridors, adjacent to neurovascular structures, and it has advantages to high-speed drills in these specific situations 30).

Complications

Outcome

The Endoscopic Endonasal Sinus and Skull Base Surgery Questionnaire (EES-Q), is a comprehensive, multidimensional, disease-specific instrument. A distinguishing characteristic is that, apart from the physical and psychological domains, the EES-Q also encompasses a social domain. Understanding different HRQoL aspects in patients undergoing EES may help caregivers restore, improve, or preserve the patient's health through individualized care, which depends on identifying their specific needs 31).

Case series

2015

The aim of a study was to evaluate the value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) using electromyography (EMG), brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs), and somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) to predict and/or prevent postoperative neurological deficits in pediatric patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) for skull base tumors.

All consecutive pediatric patients with skull base tumors who underwent EES with at least 1 modality of IONM (BAEP, SSEP, and/or EMG) at our institution between 1999 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Staged procedures and repeat procedures were identified and analyzed separately. To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of significant free-run EMG activity, the prevalence of cranial nerve (CN) deficits and the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated.

A total of 129 patients underwent 159 procedures; 6 patients had a total of 9 CN deficits. The incidences of CN deficits based on the total number of nerves monitored in the groups with and without significant free-run EMG activity were 9% and 1.5%, respectively. The incidences of CN deficits in the groups with 1 staged and more than 1 staged EES were 1.5% and 29%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values (with 95% confidence intervals) of significant EMG to detect CN deficits in repeat procedures were 0.55 (0.22-0.84), 0.86 (0.79-0.9), and 0.97 (0.92-0.99), respectively. Two patients had significant changes in their BAEPs that were reversible with an increase in mean arterial pressure.

IONM can be applied effectively and reliably during EES in children. EMG monitoring is specific for detecting CN deficits and can be an effective guide for dissecting these procedures. Triggered EMG should be elicited intraoperatively to check the integrity of the CNs during and after tumor resection. Given the anatomical complexity of pediatric EES and the unique challenges encountered, multimodal IONM can be a valuable adjunct to these procedures 32).

1)
Klatt-Cromwell CN, Thorp BD, Del Signore AG, Ebert CS, Ewend MG, Zanation AM. Reconstruction of Skull Base Defects. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2016 Feb;49(1):107-17. doi: 10.1016/j.otc.2015.09.006. Review. PubMed PMID: 26614831.
2)
Pollock JR, Akinwunmi J, Scaravilli F, Powell MP. Transcranial surgery for pituitary tumors performed by Sir Victor Horsley. Neurosurgery. 2003 Apr;52(4):914–925
3)
Caton R, Paul FT. Notes of a case of acromegaly treated by operation. Br Med J. 1893;2:1421–1423
4)
Schloffer H. On the problem of surgery on the pituitary gland. Beitr Klin Chir. 1906;50:767–817.
5)
Schloffer H. Further report on the patient operated upon for a pituitary tumor. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 1907;20:1075–1078.
6)
Hirsch O. Endonasal method of removal of hypophyseal tumors: With a report of two successful cases. JAMA. 1910;55:772–774.
7)
Cushing H. Partial hypophysectomy for acromegaly: With remarks on function of the hypophysis. Ann Surg. 1909;50:1002–1017.
8)
Cushing H. The Weir Mitchell Lecture: Surgical experiences with pituitary disorders. JAMA. 1914;63:1515–1525.
9) , 11) , 12)
Maroon JC. Skull base surgery: past, present, and future trends. Neurosurg Focus. 2005 Jul;19(1):E1.
10)
Senior BA, Ebert CS, Kolln K, Bassim MK, Younes M, Sigounas DG, et al. Minimally invasive pituitary surgery. Laryngoscope. in press.
13) , 15)
Liu JK, Das K, Weiss MH, Laws ER, Jr, Couldwell WT. The history and evolution of transsphenoidal surgery. J Neurosurg. 2001 Dec;95(6):1083–1096.
14) , 16)
Landolt AM. History of pituitary surgery from the technical aspect. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2001 Jan;12(1):37–44.
18)
Cavallo LM, Messina A, Cappabianca P, Esposito F, de Divitiis E, Gardner P, Tschabitscher M. Endoscopic endonasal surgery of the midline skull base: anatomical study and clinical considerations. Neurosurg Focus. 2005 Jul 15;19(1):E2. PubMed PMID: 16078816.
19)
Langdon C, Enseñat J, Rioja E, Jaume F, Berenguer J, Oleaga L, Bernal-Sprekelsen M, Alobid I. Long-term radiological findings after endonasal endoscopic approach to the skull base. Am J Otolaryngol. 2016 Mar-Apr;37(2):103-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2015.12.006. Epub 2015 Dec 9. PubMed PMID: 26954861.
20)
Yano S, Hide T, Shinojima N, Hasegawa Y, Kawano T, Kuratsu J. Endoscopic endonasal skull base approach for parasellar lesions: Initial experiences, results, efficacy, and complications. Surg Neurol Int. 2014 Apr 16;5:51. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.130901. eCollection 2014. PubMed PMID: 24818058; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4014825.
21)
Tomazic PV, Gellner V, Koele W, Hammer GP, Braun EM, Gerstenberger C, Clarici G, Holl E, Braun H, Stammberger H, Mokry M. Feasibility of piezoelectric endoscopic transsphenoidal craniotomy: a cadaveric study. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:341876. doi: 10.1155/2014/341876. Epub 2014 Feb 9. PubMed PMID: 24689037.
22)
Thompson CF, Suh JD, Liu Y, Bergsneider M, Wang MB. Modifications to the endoscopic approach for anterior skull base lesions improve postoperative sinonasal symptoms. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2014 Feb;75(1):65-72. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1356492. Epub 2013 Oct 10. PubMed PMID: 24498592.
23)
Castelnuovo P, Turri-Zanoni M, Battaglia P, Locatelli D, Dallan I. Endoscopic Endonasal Management of Orbital Pathologies. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2015 Jul;26(3):463-72. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2015.03.001. Epub 2015 May 7. Review. PubMed PMID: 26141364.
24)
Lobo B, Heng A, Barkhoudarian G, Griffiths CF, Kelly DF. The expanding role of the endonasal endoscopic approach in pituitary and skull base surgery: A 2014 perspective. Surg Neurol Int. 2015 May 20;6:82. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.157442. eCollection 2015. Review. PubMed PMID: 26015870; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4443401.
25)
Cavallo LM, Solari D, Tasiou A, Esposito F, de Angelis M, D'Enza AI, Cappabianca P. Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal removal of recurrent and regrowing pituitary adenomas: experience on a 59-patient series. World Neurosurg. 2013 Sep-Oct;80(3-4):342-50. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2012.10.008. Epub 2012 Oct 6. PubMed PMID: 23046913.
26)
Paluzzi A, Gardner P, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Pinheiro-Neto CD, Scopel TF, Koutourousiou M, Snyderman CH. Endoscopic endonasal approach to cholesterol granulomas of the petrous apex: a series of 17 patients: clinical article. J Neurosurg. 2012 Apr;116(4):792-8. doi: 10.3171/2011.11.JNS111077. Epub 2012 Jan 6. PubMed PMID: 22224788.
27)
Shin SS, Gardner PA, Stefko ST, Madhok R, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Snyderman CH. Endoscopic endonasal approach for nonvestibular schwannomas. Neurosurgery. 2011 Nov;69(5):1046-57; discussion 1057. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182287bb9. PubMed PMID: 21673609.
28)
Banu MA, Rathman A, Patel KS, Souweidane MM, Anand VK, Greenfield JP, Schwartz TH. Corridor-based endonasal endoscopic surgery for pediatric skull base pathology with detailed radioanatomic measurements. Neurosurgery. 2014 Jun;10 Suppl 2:273-93. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000252. PubMed PMID: 24845548.
29)
Elhadi AM, Zaidi HA, Hardesty DA, Williamson R, Cavallo C, Preul MC, Nakaji P, Little AS. Malleable Endoscope Increases Surgical Freedom When Compared to a Rigid Endoscope in Endoscopic Endonasal Approaches to the Parasellar Region. Neurosurgery. 2014 May 12. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 24818786.
30)
Rastelli MM Jr, Pinheiro-Neto CD, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Wang EW, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA. Application of ultrasonic bone curette in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery: technical note. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2014 Apr;75(2):90-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1354580. Epub 2014 Feb 17. PubMed PMID: 24719795; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3969437.
31)
Ten Dam E, Feijen RA, van den Berge MJC, Hoving EW, Kuijlen JM, van der Laan BFAM, Vermeulen KM, Krabbe PFM, Korsten-Meijer AGW. Development of the Endoscopic Endonasal Sinus and Skull Base Surgery Questionnaire. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017 Aug 23. doi: 10.1002/alr.22000. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 28834622.
32)
Elangovan C, Singh SP, Gardner P, Snyderman C, Tyler-Kabara EC, Habeych M, Crammond D, Balzer J, Thirumala PD. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during endoscopic endonasal surgery for pediatric skull base tumors. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2015 Oct 30:1-9. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26517056.
endoscopic_endonasal_approach.txt · Last modified: 2017/08/24 21:55 by administrador