Gerardo Guinto , Gerardo Y. Guinto-Nishimura , Marcos V. Sangrador-Deitos , Rodrigo Uribe-Pacheco , Rene Soto-Martinez , David Gallardo , Patricia Guinto , Alejandro Vargas , Norma Aréchiga
{"title":"Current and Future Perspectives of Microscopic and Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery for Pituitary Adenomas: A Narrative Review","authors":"Gerardo Guinto , Gerardo Y. Guinto-Nishimura , Marcos V. Sangrador-Deitos , Rodrigo Uribe-Pacheco , Rene Soto-Martinez , David Gallardo , Patricia Guinto , Alejandro Vargas , Norma Aréchiga","doi":"10.1016/j.arcmed.2023.102872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Transsphenoidal resection remains the standard treatment for most pituitary adenomas. However, the ideal surgical approach to safely access these lesions, either microsurgical or endoscopic, continues to be debated. Since the introduction of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery, centers around the world have increasingly adopted this technique, experiencing a shift away from the conventional microsurgical approach. Large series reporting the efficacy and safety of endoscopic surgery have fueled a growing interest in comparing clinical outcomes between both approaches. Still, proving superiority of either surgical approach remains an elusive task due to the inherent drawbacks of surgical observational studies, as we are still faced with a growing body of evidence reporting conflicting results. Thus, a comprehensive discussion regarding the reach and limitations of both techniques becomes necessary. In this narrative review, we perform a critical appraisal of the literature and provide an expert opinion on the state-of-the-art in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas. The advantages and limitations of each approach are assessed and compared from a technical standpoint, and their reported outcomes evaluated in the framework of this transition phase. Available evidence should be interpreted in light of individual patient characteristics and within the context of each medical center, taking into consideration the known impact that surgical expertise and multidisciplinary management hold on clinical outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8318,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Medical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188440923001108/pdfft?md5=64431682f88511a5efd155502e3ab675&pid=1-s2.0-S0188440923001108-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188440923001108","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Transsphenoidal resection remains the standard treatment for most pituitary adenomas. However, the ideal surgical approach to safely access these lesions, either microsurgical or endoscopic, continues to be debated. Since the introduction of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery, centers around the world have increasingly adopted this technique, experiencing a shift away from the conventional microsurgical approach. Large series reporting the efficacy and safety of endoscopic surgery have fueled a growing interest in comparing clinical outcomes between both approaches. Still, proving superiority of either surgical approach remains an elusive task due to the inherent drawbacks of surgical observational studies, as we are still faced with a growing body of evidence reporting conflicting results. Thus, a comprehensive discussion regarding the reach and limitations of both techniques becomes necessary. In this narrative review, we perform a critical appraisal of the literature and provide an expert opinion on the state-of-the-art in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas. The advantages and limitations of each approach are assessed and compared from a technical standpoint, and their reported outcomes evaluated in the framework of this transition phase. Available evidence should be interpreted in light of individual patient characteristics and within the context of each medical center, taking into consideration the known impact that surgical expertise and multidisciplinary management hold on clinical outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Archives of Medical Research serves as a platform for publishing original peer-reviewed medical research, aiming to bridge gaps created by medical specialization. The journal covers three main categories - biomedical, clinical, and epidemiological contributions, along with review articles and preliminary communications. With an international scope, it presents the study of diseases from diverse perspectives, offering the medical community original investigations ranging from molecular biology to clinical epidemiology in a single publication.