The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis

DSpace/Manakin Repository

The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis
Author: Muskens, Ivo S.; Briceno, Vanessa; Ouwehand, Tom L.; Castlen, Joseph P.; Gormley, William B.; Aglio, Linda S.; Zamanipoor Najafabadi, Amir H.; van Furth, Wouter R.; Smith, Timothy R.; Mekary, Rania A.; Broekman, Marike L. D.

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Muskens, I. S., V. Briceno, T. L. Ouwehand, J. P. Castlen, W. B. Gormley, L. S. Aglio, A. H. Zamanipoor Najafabadi, et al. 2017. “The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis.” Acta Neurochirurgica 160 (1): 59-75. doi:10.1007/s00701-017-3390-y. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-017-3390-y.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Object In the past decade, the endonasal transsphenoidal approach (eTSA) has become an alternative to the microsurgical transcranial approach (mTCA) for tuberculum sellae meningiomas (TSMs) and olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate which approach offered the best surgical outcomes. Methods: A systematic review of the literature from 2004 and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled incidence was calculated for gross total resection (GTR), visual improvement, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, intraoperative arterial injury, and mortality, comparing eTSA and mTCA, with p-interaction values. Results: Of 1684 studies, 64 case series were included in the meta-analysis. Using the fixed-effects model, the GTR rate was significantly higher among mTCA patients for OGM (eTSA: 70.9% vs. mTCA: 88.5%, p-interaction < 0.01), but not significantly higher for TSM (eTSA: 83.0% vs. mTCA: 85.8%, p-interaction = 0.34). Despite considerable heterogeneity, visual improvement was higher for eTSA than mTCA for TSM (p-interaction < 0.01), but not for OGM (p-interaction = 0.33). CSF leak was significantly higher among eTSA patients for both OGM (eTSA: 25.1% vs. mTCA: 10.5%, p-interaction < 0.01) and TSM (eTSA: 19.3%, vs. mTCA: 5.81%, p-interaction < 0.01). Intraoperative arterial injury was higher among eTSA (4.89%) than mTCA patients (1.86%) for TSM (p-interaction = 0.03), but not for OGM resection (p-interaction = 0.10). Mortality was not significantly different between eTSA and mTCA patients for both TSM (p-interaction = 0.14) and OGM resection (p-interaction = 0.88). Random-effect models yielded similar results. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, eTSA was not shown to be superior to mTCA for resection of both OGMs and TSMs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00701-017-3390-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Published Version: doi:10.1007/s00701-017-3390-y
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5735207/pdf/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:34651955
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters