Article
The extended endoscopic approach to perisellar and skull base lesions – Is one nostril enough?
Der erweiterte endoskopische Zugang zur Sellaregion und zur Schädelbasis – Ist ein Nasenloch ausreichend?
Search Medline for
Authors
-
Stefan Linsler
- Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Homburg, Deutschland
-
Sebastian Senger
- Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Homburg, Deutschland
-
Joachim Oertel
- Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Homburg, Deutschland
| Published: | June 26, 2020 |
|---|
Outline
Text
Objective: The extended endonasal endoscopic approach to the skull base is still under investigation. The main advantage of using this technique is to approach lesions in a minimally invasive manner thereby avoiding brain retraction. Here, the authors present the results of extended endonasal endoscopic surgery via one nostril.
Methods: All skull base procedures performed via an endonasal approach at the author’s Department between January 2011 and May 2017 were analysed prospectively. Special attention was paid to complications, radicality, advantages and disadvantages of the endoscopic technique. In addition, the application of various telescopes and the technique of dural closure were analysed.
Results: Sixty-two patients were operated on various lesions of the skull base via an extended endonasal approach. Seven lesions were resected via a binostril technique. All other lesions could be visualized by the mononostril technique. In 2 of 62 cases, the authors had to switch to the binostril technique. MRI revealed radical gross total resection in 93% of all cases when intended. Overall complication rate was 16% (9/55) in the mononostril and 57% (4/7) in the binostril cohort. Seven patients in the mononostril cohort (13%) versus three patients in the binostril cohort (43%) complained of postoperative nasal congestion.
Conclusion: This clinical report shows that many extended skull base lesions can be treated by a mononostril endonasal approach. In selected cases, this technique might represent an alternative to the binostril approach. Nevertheless, the binostril technique offers a better range of manipulation and exposure and should be preferred in difficult and very extended cases.
