The telovelar approach for fourth ventricular tumors in children: is removal of the posterior arch of C1 necessary?

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Child's Nervous System Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-04 DOI:10.1007/s00381-024-06443-3
Anna Cho, Maria Aliotti Lippolis, Johannes Herta, Muhammet Dogan, Cora Hedrich, Amedeo A Azizi, Andreas Peyrl, Johannes Gojo, Thomas Czech, Christian Dorfer
{"title":"The telovelar approach for fourth ventricular tumors in children: is removal of the posterior arch of C1 necessary?","authors":"Anna Cho, Maria Aliotti Lippolis, Johannes Herta, Muhammet Dogan, Cora Hedrich, Amedeo A Azizi, Andreas Peyrl, Johannes Gojo, Thomas Czech, Christian Dorfer","doi":"10.1007/s00381-024-06443-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Various surgical nuances of the telovelar approach have been suggested. The necessity of removing the posterior arch of C1 to accomplish optimal tumor exposure is still debated. Therefore, we report on our experience and technical details of the fourth ventricular tumor resection in a modified prone position without systematic removal of the posterior arch of C1.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of all pediatric patients, who underwent a fourth ventricular tumor resection in the modified prone position between 2012 and 2021, was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 40 patients with a median age of 6 years and a M:F ratio of 25:15. A telovelar approach was performed in all cases. In 39/40 patients, the posterior arch of C1 was not removed. In the remaining patient, the reason for removing C1 was tumor extension below the level of C2 with ventral extension. Gross or near total resection could be achieved in 34/39 patients, and subtotal resection in 5/39 patients. In none of the patients, a limited exposure, sight of view, or range of motion caused by the posterior arch of C1 was encountered, necessitating an unplanned removal of the posterior arch of C1. Importantly, in none of the cases, the surgeon had the impression of a limited sight of view to the most rostral parts of the fourth ventricle, which necessitated a vermian incision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A telovelar approach without the removal of the posterior arch of C1 allows for an optimal exposure of the fourth ventricle provided that critical nuances in patient positioning are considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":9970,"journal":{"name":"Child's Nervous System","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11322403/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child's Nervous System","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-024-06443-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Various surgical nuances of the telovelar approach have been suggested. The necessity of removing the posterior arch of C1 to accomplish optimal tumor exposure is still debated. Therefore, we report on our experience and technical details of the fourth ventricular tumor resection in a modified prone position without systematic removal of the posterior arch of C1.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of all pediatric patients, who underwent a fourth ventricular tumor resection in the modified prone position between 2012 and 2021, was performed.

Results: We identified 40 patients with a median age of 6 years and a M:F ratio of 25:15. A telovelar approach was performed in all cases. In 39/40 patients, the posterior arch of C1 was not removed. In the remaining patient, the reason for removing C1 was tumor extension below the level of C2 with ventral extension. Gross or near total resection could be achieved in 34/39 patients, and subtotal resection in 5/39 patients. In none of the patients, a limited exposure, sight of view, or range of motion caused by the posterior arch of C1 was encountered, necessitating an unplanned removal of the posterior arch of C1. Importantly, in none of the cases, the surgeon had the impression of a limited sight of view to the most rostral parts of the fourth ventricle, which necessitated a vermian incision.

Conclusion: A telovelar approach without the removal of the posterior arch of C1 allows for an optimal exposure of the fourth ventricle provided that critical nuances in patient positioning are considered.

Abstract Image

儿童第四脑室肿瘤的远心端入路:是否有必要切除 C1 后弓?
目的:人们提出了各种远隔入路手术的细微差别。关于是否有必要切除 C1 后弓以达到最佳肿瘤暴露效果,目前仍存在争议。因此,我们报告了在改良俯卧位、不系统切除 C1 后弓的情况下切除第四脑室肿瘤的经验和技术细节:方法:我们对 2012 年至 2021 年期间接受改良俯卧位第四脑室肿瘤切除术的所有儿科患者进行了回顾性分析:结果:我们共发现40名患者,中位年龄为6岁,男女比例为25:15。所有病例均采用远心端入路。在 39/40 例患者中,C1 后弓未被切除。其余患者切除C1的原因是肿瘤向C2水平以下腹侧延伸。34/39例患者实现了全切除或接近全切除,5/39例患者实现了次全切除。没有一名患者因 C1 后弓造成的暴露、视野或活动范围受限而不得不在计划外切除 C1 后弓。重要的是,在所有病例中,外科医生都没有感觉到第四脑室最喙突部分的视野受限,因此必须进行蚓部切口:结论:不切除 C1 后弓的远侧入路可以最佳地暴露第四脑室,但必须考虑到患者体位的细微差别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Child's Nervous System
Child's Nervous System 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
322
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal has been expanded to encompass all aspects of pediatric neurosciences concerning the developmental and acquired abnormalities of the nervous system and its coverings, functional disorders, epilepsy, spasticity, basic and clinical neuro-oncology, rehabilitation and trauma. Global pediatric neurosurgery is an additional field of interest that will be considered for publication in the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信