单鼻孔、双鼻孔和一个半鼻孔经蝶窦入路治疗垂体腺瘤的比较

S. Yousefzadeh-Chabok, G. Sharifi, M. Ghorbani, M. Samadian, N. Kalani, A. Kazeminezhad
{"title":"单鼻孔、双鼻孔和一个半鼻孔经蝶窦入路治疗垂体腺瘤的比较","authors":"S. Yousefzadeh-Chabok, G. Sharifi, M. Ghorbani, M. Samadian, N. Kalani, A. Kazeminezhad","doi":"10.32598/irjns.7.1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aim: EETA (Endoscopic Endonasal Transsphenoidal Approach) is a preferred choice for pituitary tumors. EETA offers minimal invasiveness, fewer complications, and better outcomes than the sublabial or transseptal microscopic approach. EETA has three approaches: mononostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, binostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, and one and a half nostril approach. This study aims to compare three different EETAs and compare between microscopic transsphenoidal approach, transcranial approach and EETA. Methods and Materials/Patients: To provide up-to-date information, we concisely reviewed these three EETAs. Using the keywords of “neuroendoscopy”, “META” (Mononostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “OETA” (One and a half nostril Approach), “BETA” (Binostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “pituitary adenoma”, “EETA”, “endoscopy”, “transsphenoidal approach”, “transcranial approach for pituitary adenoma” and “microscopic transsphenoidal approach”. We retrieved all the relevant articles from Google Scholar, PubMed, and Medline. Then, we reviewed them and critically analyzed them. Results: In BETA there is free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field and a broader view of the sphenoid sinus and it is an excellent approach to resect large tumors. The META is suitable in tumors with limited involvement of the intra-sellar and supra-sellar area. The mononostril approach is not suitable and has some limitations for the following situations: a crowded narrow nasal cavity, a harder tumor with the invasive appearance or significant suprasellar extension, and lesions other than pituitary adenomas. The OETA provides a sufficient surgical corridor for a 2-surgeon/4 or 3-hands technique with a minimal injury of the nose and good operative results, free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field, low post-operative morbidity, and good post-operative quality of life. Conclusion: In EETA, knowing the size and consistency of tumor, general versus invasive pituitary adenoma, and the extent of parasellar and suprasellar extension, is essential. If we cannot reach a pituitary macroadenoma with a trans-sphenoidal approach, then we can use a transcranial approach for the removal of the tumor. The microscopic transsphenoidal approach is suitable for pediatric pituitary adenoma","PeriodicalId":53336,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Mononostril, Binostril, and One and a Half Nostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach for Treating Pituitary AdenomaPituitary Adenoma\",\"authors\":\"S. Yousefzadeh-Chabok, G. Sharifi, M. Ghorbani, M. Samadian, N. Kalani, A. Kazeminezhad\",\"doi\":\"10.32598/irjns.7.1.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and Aim: EETA (Endoscopic Endonasal Transsphenoidal Approach) is a preferred choice for pituitary tumors. EETA offers minimal invasiveness, fewer complications, and better outcomes than the sublabial or transseptal microscopic approach. EETA has three approaches: mononostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, binostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, and one and a half nostril approach. This study aims to compare three different EETAs and compare between microscopic transsphenoidal approach, transcranial approach and EETA. Methods and Materials/Patients: To provide up-to-date information, we concisely reviewed these three EETAs. Using the keywords of “neuroendoscopy”, “META” (Mononostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “OETA” (One and a half nostril Approach), “BETA” (Binostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “pituitary adenoma”, “EETA”, “endoscopy”, “transsphenoidal approach”, “transcranial approach for pituitary adenoma” and “microscopic transsphenoidal approach”. We retrieved all the relevant articles from Google Scholar, PubMed, and Medline. Then, we reviewed them and critically analyzed them. Results: In BETA there is free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field and a broader view of the sphenoid sinus and it is an excellent approach to resect large tumors. The META is suitable in tumors with limited involvement of the intra-sellar and supra-sellar area. The mononostril approach is not suitable and has some limitations for the following situations: a crowded narrow nasal cavity, a harder tumor with the invasive appearance or significant suprasellar extension, and lesions other than pituitary adenomas. The OETA provides a sufficient surgical corridor for a 2-surgeon/4 or 3-hands technique with a minimal injury of the nose and good operative results, free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field, low post-operative morbidity, and good post-operative quality of life. Conclusion: In EETA, knowing the size and consistency of tumor, general versus invasive pituitary adenoma, and the extent of parasellar and suprasellar extension, is essential. If we cannot reach a pituitary macroadenoma with a trans-sphenoidal approach, then we can use a transcranial approach for the removal of the tumor. The microscopic transsphenoidal approach is suitable for pediatric pituitary adenoma\",\"PeriodicalId\":53336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32598/irjns.7.1.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32598/irjns.7.1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:鼻内经蝶窦入路是垂体肿瘤的首选入路。EETA具有最小的侵入性,较少的并发症,并且比唇下或经隔膜显微入路有更好的结果。EETA有三种入路:单鼻孔经蝶入路、双鼻孔经蝶入路和一个半鼻孔入路。本研究旨在比较三种不同的EETA,并比较显微经蝶入路、经颅入路和EETA。方法和材料/患者:为了提供最新的信息,我们对这三种eeta进行了简要的回顾。使用关键词“神经内镜”、“META”(单鼻孔内镜经蝶入路)、“OETA”(单鼻孔内镜经蝶入路)、“BETA”(双鼻孔内镜经蝶入路)、“垂体腺瘤”、“EETA”、“内镜”、“经蝶入路”、“经颅垂体腺瘤入路”、“显微经蝶入路”。我们从b谷歌Scholar, PubMed和Medline检索了所有相关文章。然后,我们回顾并批判性地分析它们。结果:手术器械在手术野内活动自如,蝶窦视野开阔,是切除大肿瘤的理想入路。META适用于鞍内和鞍上区域受累有限的肿瘤。单鼻孔入路不适用于以下情况,且有一定的局限性:拥挤狭窄的鼻腔,有侵袭性外观或明显的鞍上延伸的较硬的肿瘤,以及垂体腺瘤以外的病变。OETA为2人4手或3手技术提供了充足的手术通道,对鼻部的损伤最小,手术效果好,手术器械在手术区域内移动自由方便,术后发病率低,术后生活质量好。结论:在EETA中,了解肿瘤的大小和一致性,全身性与侵袭性垂体腺瘤,以及鞍旁和鞍上延伸的程度是必要的。如果经蝶窦入路不能到达垂体大腺瘤,那么我们可以采用经颅入路切除肿瘤。经蝶窦入路适用于小儿垂体腺瘤
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Mononostril, Binostril, and One and a Half Nostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach for Treating Pituitary AdenomaPituitary Adenoma
Background and Aim: EETA (Endoscopic Endonasal Transsphenoidal Approach) is a preferred choice for pituitary tumors. EETA offers minimal invasiveness, fewer complications, and better outcomes than the sublabial or transseptal microscopic approach. EETA has three approaches: mononostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, binostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, and one and a half nostril approach. This study aims to compare three different EETAs and compare between microscopic transsphenoidal approach, transcranial approach and EETA. Methods and Materials/Patients: To provide up-to-date information, we concisely reviewed these three EETAs. Using the keywords of “neuroendoscopy”, “META” (Mononostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “OETA” (One and a half nostril Approach), “BETA” (Binostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “pituitary adenoma”, “EETA”, “endoscopy”, “transsphenoidal approach”, “transcranial approach for pituitary adenoma” and “microscopic transsphenoidal approach”. We retrieved all the relevant articles from Google Scholar, PubMed, and Medline. Then, we reviewed them and critically analyzed them. Results: In BETA there is free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field and a broader view of the sphenoid sinus and it is an excellent approach to resect large tumors. The META is suitable in tumors with limited involvement of the intra-sellar and supra-sellar area. The mononostril approach is not suitable and has some limitations for the following situations: a crowded narrow nasal cavity, a harder tumor with the invasive appearance or significant suprasellar extension, and lesions other than pituitary adenomas. The OETA provides a sufficient surgical corridor for a 2-surgeon/4 or 3-hands technique with a minimal injury of the nose and good operative results, free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field, low post-operative morbidity, and good post-operative quality of life. Conclusion: In EETA, knowing the size and consistency of tumor, general versus invasive pituitary adenoma, and the extent of parasellar and suprasellar extension, is essential. If we cannot reach a pituitary macroadenoma with a trans-sphenoidal approach, then we can use a transcranial approach for the removal of the tumor. The microscopic transsphenoidal approach is suitable for pediatric pituitary adenoma
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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