Effect of pituitary stalk preservation during craniopharyngioma removal on pituitary function, extent of resection, and recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ahmad I Kamaludin, Michael Amoo, Jack Henry, Gerda Reischer, Mohsen Javadpour
{"title":"Effect of pituitary stalk preservation during craniopharyngioma removal on pituitary function, extent of resection, and recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ahmad I Kamaludin, Michael Amoo, Jack Henry, Gerda Reischer, Mohsen Javadpour","doi":"10.3171/2024.5.JNS232790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Optimal management of the pituitary stalk during craniopharyngioma resection remains a controversial subject. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of pituitary stalk preservation on postoperative diabetes insipidus (DI), anterior pituitary function (PF), extent of resection, and recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline was searched via Ovid for relevant articles from inception to September 2, 2022. Studies reporting the rates of DI or anterior PF postoperatively or at last follow-up, extent of resection, or tumor recurrence at last follow-up were eligible for inclusion. The risk ratio (RR) for each outcome was calculated. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with additional stratification by age. To assess for risk of bias across studies, funnel plots and the Egger's test were utilized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 3488 abstracts and 150 full-text articles were reviewed, resulting in 33 studies with a total of 2366 patients for inclusion. In the comparative meta-analysis, pituitary stalk preservation significantly decreased the risk of DI postoperatively (17 studies, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81, I2 = 75%), DI at last follow-up (6 studies, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.72, I2 = 20%), and abnormal anterior PF postoperatively (15 studies, RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.89, I2 = 49%) but not abnormal anterior PF at last follow-up (4 studies, RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09-1.63, I2 = 64%). There were no significant differences in the rates of incomplete resection (12 studies, RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.77-3.28, I2 = 68%) or tumor recurrence (9 studies, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92-1.51, I2 = 0%) between the preservation and sacrifice groups. However, subgroup analysis of pediatric patients revealed a higher risk of incomplete resection (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.17-9.26, I2 = 70%) in the stalk preservation group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pituitary stalk preservation was demonstrated to confer protective benefit on PF, although the benefit persisted on long-term follow-up for posterior PF only. Stalk preservation in pediatric patients should be given careful consideration, as it is associated with higher rates of incomplete resection. These results should be interpreted with caution due to inclusion of small studies and inadequate reporting of outcomes in the literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":16505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.5.JNS232790","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Optimal management of the pituitary stalk during craniopharyngioma resection remains a controversial subject. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of pituitary stalk preservation on postoperative diabetes insipidus (DI), anterior pituitary function (PF), extent of resection, and recurrence.

Methods: Medline was searched via Ovid for relevant articles from inception to September 2, 2022. Studies reporting the rates of DI or anterior PF postoperatively or at last follow-up, extent of resection, or tumor recurrence at last follow-up were eligible for inclusion. The risk ratio (RR) for each outcome was calculated. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed with additional stratification by age. To assess for risk of bias across studies, funnel plots and the Egger's test were utilized.

Results: In total, 3488 abstracts and 150 full-text articles were reviewed, resulting in 33 studies with a total of 2366 patients for inclusion. In the comparative meta-analysis, pituitary stalk preservation significantly decreased the risk of DI postoperatively (17 studies, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.81, I2 = 75%), DI at last follow-up (6 studies, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.72, I2 = 20%), and abnormal anterior PF postoperatively (15 studies, RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.89, I2 = 49%) but not abnormal anterior PF at last follow-up (4 studies, RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09-1.63, I2 = 64%). There were no significant differences in the rates of incomplete resection (12 studies, RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.77-3.28, I2 = 68%) or tumor recurrence (9 studies, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92-1.51, I2 = 0%) between the preservation and sacrifice groups. However, subgroup analysis of pediatric patients revealed a higher risk of incomplete resection (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.17-9.26, I2 = 70%) in the stalk preservation group.

Conclusions: Pituitary stalk preservation was demonstrated to confer protective benefit on PF, although the benefit persisted on long-term follow-up for posterior PF only. Stalk preservation in pediatric patients should be given careful consideration, as it is associated with higher rates of incomplete resection. These results should be interpreted with caution due to inclusion of small studies and inadequate reporting of outcomes in the literature.

颅咽管瘤切除术中保留垂体柄对垂体功能、切除范围和复发的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:颅咽管瘤切除术中垂体柄的最佳处理仍是一个有争议的问题。这项荟萃分析旨在评估保留垂体柄对术后糖尿病(DI)、垂体前叶功能(PF)、切除范围和复发的影响:通过 Ovid 在 Medline 上检索了从开始到 2022 年 9 月 2 日的相关文章。报告术后或最后一次随访时垂体前叶功能(DI)或垂体前叶功能(PF)率、切除范围或最后一次随访时肿瘤复发率的研究均符合纳入条件。计算每种结果的风险比(RR)。在进行随机效应荟萃分析时,还根据年龄进行了分层。为了评估各研究的偏倚风险,采用了漏斗图和 Egger 检验:共查阅了 3488 篇摘要和 150 篇全文文章,最终纳入了 33 项研究,共计 2366 名患者。在比较荟萃分析中,保留垂体柄可显著降低术后DI风险(17 项研究,RR 0.67,95% CI 0.55-0.81,I2 = 75%)、最后随访时DI风险(6 项研究,RR 0.54,95% CI 0.41-0.72,I2 = 20%)、术后前方 PF 异常(15 项研究,RR 0.78,95% CI 0.69-0.89,I2 = 49%),但最后一次随访时前方 PF 异常(4 项研究,RR 0.38,95% CI 0.09-1.63,I2 = 64%)。保留组和牺牲组的不完全切除率(12 项研究,RR 1.59,95% CI 0.77-3.28,I2 = 68%)或肿瘤复发率(9 项研究,RR 1.18,95% CI 0.92-1.51,I2 = 0%)无明显差异。然而,对儿科患者进行的亚组分析显示,保留柄组患者不完全切除的风险更高(RR 3.29,95% CI 1.17-9.26,I2 = 70%):结论:垂体柄保留被证明对PF具有保护性益处,但这种益处仅在后PF的长期随访中持续存在。儿科患者保留垂体柄应慎重考虑,因为它与较高的不完全切除率相关。由于纳入的研究规模较小,且文献中对结果的报告不足,因此在解释这些结果时应谨慎。
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
Journal of neurosurgery
Journal of neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1003
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, and Neurosurgical Focus are devoted to the publication of original works relating primarily to neurosurgery, including studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology. The Editors and Editorial Boards encourage submission of clinical and laboratory studies. Other manuscripts accepted for review include technical notes on instruments or equipment that are innovative or useful to clinicians and researchers in the field of neuroscience; papers describing unusual cases; manuscripts on historical persons or events related to neurosurgery; and in Neurosurgical Focus, occasional reviews. Letters to the Editor commenting on articles recently published in the Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics are welcome.
×
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