Cargando…

Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach

BACKGROUND: The endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach (EETA) to the pituitary is performed by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeons in collaboration with neurosurgeons but also by neurosurgeons alone even though neurosurgeons have not been trained in rhinological surgery. PURPOSE: To register...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Lindert, Erik J., Ingels, Koen, Mylanus, Emmanuel, Grotenhuis, J. André
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Vienna 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872017/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20306338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0629-2
_version_ 1782181196033163264
author van Lindert, Erik J.
Ingels, Koen
Mylanus, Emmanuel
Grotenhuis, J. André
author_facet van Lindert, Erik J.
Ingels, Koen
Mylanus, Emmanuel
Grotenhuis, J. André
author_sort van Lindert, Erik J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach (EETA) to the pituitary is performed by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeons in collaboration with neurosurgeons but also by neurosurgeons alone even though neurosurgeons have not been trained in rhinological surgery. PURPOSE: To register the frequency of endonasal anatomical variations and to evaluate whether these variations hinder the progress of EETA and require extra rhinological surgical skills. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 185 consecutive patients receiving an EETA through a binostril approach was performed. All anatomical endonasal variations were noted and the relevance for the progress of surgery evaluated. RESULTS: In 48% of patients, anatomical variations were recognized, the majority of which were spinae septi and septum deviations. In 5% of patients, the planned binostril approach had to be converted into a mononostril approach; whereas in 18% of patients with an anatomical variation, a correction had to be performed. There was no difference between the ENT surgeon and the neurosurgeon performing the approach. Complications related to the endonasal phase of the surgery occurred in 3.8%. Fluoroscopy or electromagnetic navigation has been used during 6.5% of the surgeries. CONCLUSION: Although endonasal anatomical variations are frequent, they do not pose a relevant obstacle for EETA.
format Text
id pubmed-2872017
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer Vienna
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28720172010-05-26 Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach van Lindert, Erik J. Ingels, Koen Mylanus, Emmanuel Grotenhuis, J. André Acta Neurochir (Wien) Clinical Article BACKGROUND: The endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach (EETA) to the pituitary is performed by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeons in collaboration with neurosurgeons but also by neurosurgeons alone even though neurosurgeons have not been trained in rhinological surgery. PURPOSE: To register the frequency of endonasal anatomical variations and to evaluate whether these variations hinder the progress of EETA and require extra rhinological surgical skills. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 185 consecutive patients receiving an EETA through a binostril approach was performed. All anatomical endonasal variations were noted and the relevance for the progress of surgery evaluated. RESULTS: In 48% of patients, anatomical variations were recognized, the majority of which were spinae septi and septum deviations. In 5% of patients, the planned binostril approach had to be converted into a mononostril approach; whereas in 18% of patients with an anatomical variation, a correction had to be performed. There was no difference between the ENT surgeon and the neurosurgeon performing the approach. Complications related to the endonasal phase of the surgery occurred in 3.8%. Fluoroscopy or electromagnetic navigation has been used during 6.5% of the surgeries. CONCLUSION: Although endonasal anatomical variations are frequent, they do not pose a relevant obstacle for EETA. Springer Vienna 2010-03-23 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2872017/ /pubmed/20306338 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0629-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Clinical Article
van Lindert, Erik J.
Ingels, Koen
Mylanus, Emmanuel
Grotenhuis, J. André
Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title_full Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title_fullStr Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title_full_unstemmed Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title_short Variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
title_sort variations of endonasal anatomy: relevance for the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach
topic Clinical Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872017/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20306338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0629-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vanlinderterikj variationsofendonasalanatomyrelevancefortheendoscopicendonasaltranssphenoidalapproach
AT ingelskoen variationsofendonasalanatomyrelevancefortheendoscopicendonasaltranssphenoidalapproach
AT mylanusemmanuel variationsofendonasalanatomyrelevancefortheendoscopicendonasaltranssphenoidalapproach
AT grotenhuisjandre variationsofendonasalanatomyrelevancefortheendoscopicendonasaltranssphenoidalapproach