Endoscopic endonasal approach for suprasellar meningiomas: introduction of a new scoring system to predict extent of resection and assist in case selection with long-term outcome data

View More View Less
  • 1 Departments of Neurosurgery and
  • | 2 Otolaryngology, Weill Cornell Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital;
  • | 3 Department of Neurosurgery, Columbia University Medical Center, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York; and
  • | 4 Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt
Free access

OBJECTIVE

The endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) has gained increasing popularity for the resection of suprasellar meningiomas (SSMs). Appropriate case selection is critical in optimizing patient outcome. Long-term outcome data are lacking. The authors systematically identified preoperative factors associated with extent of resection (EOR) and determined the relationship between EOR and long-term recurrence after EEA for SSMs.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, the authors identified preoperative clinical and imaging characteristics associated with EOR and built on the recently published University of California, San Francisco resectability score to propose a score more specific to the EEA. They then examined the relationship between gross-total resection (GTR; 100%), near-total resection (NTR; 95%–99%), and subtotal resection (STR; < 95%) and recurrence or progression with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients were identified. Radiographic GTR was achieved in 40 of 47 (85%) patients in whom it was the surgical goal. Significant independent risk factors for incomplete resection were prior surgery (OR 25.94, 95% CI < 2.00 to 336.49, p = 0.013); tumor lateral to the optic nerve (OR 13.41, 95% CI 1.82–98.99, p = 0.011); and complete internal carotid artery (ICA) encasement (OR 15.12, 95% CI 1.17–194.08, p = 0.037). Tumor size and optic canal invasion were not significant risk factors after adjustment for other variables. A resectability score based on the multivariable model successfully predicted the likelihood of GTR; a score of 0 had a positive predictive value of 97% for GTR, whereas a score of 2 had a negative predictive value of 87.5% for incomplete resection. After a mean follow-up of 40.6 ± 32.4 months (mean ± SD), recurrence was 2.7% after GTR (1 patient with atypical histology), 44.4% after NTR, and 80% after STR (p < 0.0001). Vision was stable or improved in 93.5% and improved in 67.4% of patients with a preoperative deficit. There were 5 (9.8%) postoperative CSF leaks, of which 4 were managed with lumbar drains and 1 required a reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

The EEA is a safe and effective approach to SSMs, with favorable visual outcomes in well-selected cases. The combination of postoperative MRI-based EOR with direct endoscopic inspection can be used in lieu of Simpson grade to predict recurrence. GTR dramatically reduces recurrence and can be achieved regardless of tumor size, proximity or encasement of the anterior cerebral artery, or medial optic canal invasion. Risk factors for incomplete resection include prior surgery, tumor lateral to the optic nerve, and complete ICA encasement.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACA = anterior cerebral artery; EEA = endoscopic endonasal approach; EOR = extent of resection; GTR = gross-total resection; ICA = internal carotid artery; NTR = near-total resection; PS = planum sphenoidale; SSM = suprasellar meningioma; STR = subtotal resection; TCA = transcranial approach; TS = tuberculum sellae; UCSF = University of California, San Francisco.

OBJECTIVE

The endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) has gained increasing popularity for the resection of suprasellar meningiomas (SSMs). Appropriate case selection is critical in optimizing patient outcome. Long-term outcome data are lacking. The authors systematically identified preoperative factors associated with extent of resection (EOR) and determined the relationship between EOR and long-term recurrence after EEA for SSMs.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, the authors identified preoperative clinical and imaging characteristics associated with EOR and built on the recently published University of California, San Francisco resectability score to propose a score more specific to the EEA. They then examined the relationship between gross-total resection (GTR; 100%), near-total resection (NTR; 95%–99%), and subtotal resection (STR; < 95%) and recurrence or progression with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients were identified. Radiographic GTR was achieved in 40 of 47 (85%) patients in whom it was the surgical goal. Significant independent risk factors for incomplete resection were prior surgery (OR 25.94, 95% CI < 2.00 to 336.49, p = 0.013); tumor lateral to the optic nerve (OR 13.41, 95% CI 1.82–98.99, p = 0.011); and complete internal carotid artery (ICA) encasement (OR 15.12, 95% CI 1.17–194.08, p = 0.037). Tumor size and optic canal invasion were not significant risk factors after adjustment for other variables. A resectability score based on the multivariable model successfully predicted the likelihood of GTR; a score of 0 had a positive predictive value of 97% for GTR, whereas a score of 2 had a negative predictive value of 87.5% for incomplete resection. After a mean follow-up of 40.6 ± 32.4 months (mean ± SD), recurrence was 2.7% after GTR (1 patient with atypical histology), 44.4% after NTR, and 80% after STR (p < 0.0001). Vision was stable or improved in 93.5% and improved in 67.4% of patients with a preoperative deficit. There were 5 (9.8%) postoperative CSF leaks, of which 4 were managed with lumbar drains and 1 required a reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

The EEA is a safe and effective approach to SSMs, with favorable visual outcomes in well-selected cases. The combination of postoperative MRI-based EOR with direct endoscopic inspection can be used in lieu of Simpson grade to predict recurrence. GTR dramatically reduces recurrence and can be achieved regardless of tumor size, proximity or encasement of the anterior cerebral artery, or medial optic canal invasion. Risk factors for incomplete resection include prior surgery, tumor lateral to the optic nerve, and complete ICA encasement.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACA = anterior cerebral artery; EEA = endoscopic endonasal approach; EOR = extent of resection; GTR = gross-total resection; ICA = internal carotid artery; NTR = near-total resection; PS = planum sphenoidale; SSM = suprasellar meningioma; STR = subtotal resection; TCA = transcranial approach; TS = tuberculum sellae; UCSF = University of California, San Francisco.

In Brief

The authors show that the endoscopic endonasal technique is a safe and effective approach to suprasellar meningiomas, with favorable visual outcomes. The combination of postoperative MRI and direct endoscopic inspection can be used in lieu of Simpson grade to predict recurrence. Gross-total resection dramatically reduces long-term recurrence and can be achieved regardless of tumor size, relation to the anterior cerebral artery, or medial optic canal invasion. Risk factors for incomplete resection include prior surgery, tumor lateral to the optic nerve, and complete internal carotid artery encasement. A 3-item score based on these factors is highly predictive of extent of resection.

Suprasellar meningiomas (SSMs), arising from the tuberculum sellae (TS) or planum sphenoidale (PS), often present with visual impairment. The goals of surgery are vision preservation or improvement with maximal safe resection, ideally leading to cure or long-term tumor control. SSMs sit adjacent to the optic nerves and chiasm, internal carotid artery (ICA) and anterior cerebral artery (ACA), and pituitary gland, making them technically challenging to remove. A variety of transcranial approaches (TCAs) are effective and were long the standard of care.1–5 However, endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEAs) offer several potential advantages including direct access to the tumor’s meningeal origin, adjacent invaded bone, and blood supply, as well as visualization of the medial optic canal, medial paraclinoid ICA, and diaphragma sellae, with minimal retraction of the frontal lobes and optic apparatus. With experience and technical advances, EEAs can achieve comparable rates of gross-total resection (GTR) with better postoperative visual outcomes compared to TCAs.6–11 Using closure techniques such as the nasoseptal flap and button or gasket seal, rates of postoperative CSF leakage have been significantly reduced compared with early reports.12–14

Although EEA has gained wider acceptance, the criteria for selecting EEA and its long-term results are less well understood.15–18 A recent systematic review and consensus statement suggested that an EEA is likely to be the preferred surgical approach for small- to medium-sized TS meningiomas with inferomedial optic canal invasion.6 Several series have identified criteria that may prevent GTR of SSMs including tumor size,19,20 vascular encasement,19–22 optic canal invasion,20 and short or limited operative experience.23 Other exclusively EEA series have suggested that optic canal invasion19,21 and tumor size21 may not predict incomplete resection. The recently published University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) grading scale by Magill et al.20 is the most comprehensive to date but was developed from a combined series of EEA and TCA surgeries and does not consider several factors and scoring cutoffs that may be important to the EEA specifically.

In order to identify the most critical factors for EEA case selection, we applied the UCSF scale and added several additional criteria that may impact extent of resection (EOR) to our large series of exclusively EEA cases. We could therefore establish which criteria were most predictive of incomplete resection and create a grading scale specific to the EEA approach. We then assessed the relationship between GTR and tumor recurrence or progression to investigate the efficacy of the EEA at tumor control with longer follow-up than previously reported.

Methods

Study Design, Setting, and Participants

This is a retrospective cohort study based on a prospectively collected consecutive database of all endonasal endoscopic surgeries done by the senior author (T.H.S.) at Weill Cornell Medicine. Patients were included if they were ≥ 18 years old and had undergone EEA resection of an SSM (those arising from the TS and PS, in accordance with a recent consensus statement6) between January 2008 and June 2019. We have previously described a classification and management algorithm for anterior skull base tumors that has been in place at our institution since 2008.24 Tumors with > 50% of their rostrocaudal diameter in front of the anterior wall of the sphenoid sinus were managed as olfactory groove meningiomas, generally through an eyebrow incision.24 Meningiomas arising from, or predominantly limited to, the cavernous sinus or anterior or posterior clinoids were also excluded. The surgeon noted prospectively at the time of surgery if the goal was GTR or subtotal resection (STR) and, after surgery, if a small fragment of tumor adherent to a critical neurovascular structure was left behind. These data were used to downgrade radiographic GTRs to near-total resections (NTRs) as discussed below.

The study was approved by the Weill Cornell Medicine Institutional Review Board, and the manuscript follows STROBE guidelines.25

Surgical Technique

Details of the EEA for SSMs have been described in detail elsewhere.23,26 In brief, the superior turbinate on the left side is generally removed to make room for the endoscope. In some circumstances, the inferior or posterior aspect of the middle turbinate is also removed if required to allow adequate instrument maneuverability. The rostrum of the sphenoid sinus is drilled flat to enlarge the working space and allow the nasoseptal flap to cover the defect while minimizing dead space. The posterior ethmoids are opened to provide sufficient lateral exposure. The bone opening is expanded to include the medial opticocarotid recesses and medial optic canals. The PS bone is removed to the most anterior extent of the tumor.

Tumors are internally decompressed using suction or a radiofrequency monopolar ball electrode (Elliquence). The anterosuperior margin of the tumor is dissected free above the planum, where there is the least chance of encountering a cortical blood vessel. Extracapsular dissection is then performed over the top of the tumor—sometimes a 30° endoscope is needed—back to the optic chiasm and then laterally to remove tumor margins from the optic nerves and medial optic canals. The superior intercavernous sinus is cauterized and cut to define the inferior extent of the tumor, and the stalk is identified. Finally, the posterior and inferior midline aspects of the tumor are removed off the stalk and mammillary bodies, typically by using a 0° scope. Any intrasellar component is resected with careful attention to maintaining a plane between tumor and normal pituitary gland.

Closure was performed according to our previously published protocol.14 All intradural nonsellar defects with high-flow CSF leaks are preferentially closed first with an inlay of Duraform (Natus Medical), followed by the gasket-seal closure when feasible. The gasket seal involves an onlay of fascia lata (or more recently AlloMax acellular dermal matrix; Davol) held in place with MEDPOR (Porex).12,27 In cases in which there was an inadequate rim of bone or lack of a single plane in which to wedge the MEDPOR for a gasket seal, a button approach was used in which two layers of fascia lata or AlloMax were sutured together in the middle for an inlay-onlay composite.28 The gasket seal or button was then covered with a pedicled, vascularized nasoseptal flap,29 which is held in place with dural sealant. In most cases, a lumbar drain is placed at the beginning of the operation and used to introduce intrathecal fluorescein30 and for intermittent drainage for approximately 24 hours after surgery.

Outcomes

The primary outcome was EOR. Tumor volume was estimated on pre- and postoperative MRI (0.523*A*B*C) and radiographic EOR classified as GTR (100%), NTR (95%–99%), or STR (< 95%) by a board-certified neuroradiologist. We did not use the Simpson grading system for several reasons. First, recent literature has questioned the relevance of a distinction between grades 1, 2, and 3, particularly with respect to tumors located in the skull base.31–33 The original Simpson grading system was developed in 1957 and seems less relevant in the modern era of MRI scans, microsurgery, and stereotactic radiosurgery (sometimes administered to residual tumor before it has a chance to recur). Moreover, it is unclear if one can ever determine the actual Simpson grade of a meningioma removed endonasally. Although the bone and dural attachment are always removed, rendering most tumors in theory grade 1, the lack of adequate lateral visualization along the skull base around the peripheral attachment of the dura mater raises the possibility of residual tumor tail that cannot be adequately inspected. Hence, any Simpson grading following an EEA is unreliable.

Our hypothesis is that EEA in appropriately chosen and performed cases will result in the equivalence of a Simpson grade 1, which will be reflected in appropriately low recurrence rates for patients in whom GTR is achieved with adequate postoperative follow-up. Moreover, given that microscopic inspection of the tumor bed can sometimes reveal small fragments of tumor that the surgeon believes cannot be safely resected because these fragments are adherent to either the optic nerves or carotid artery, which are below the resolution of an MRI scan, some patients with a radiographic GTR need their EOR to be classified as NTR (99% removal).

Tumor progression (after NTR or STR) and recurrence (after GTR) were determined by neuroradiology interpretation of follow-up MRI showing > 25% increase in volume. Vision was classified as improved, stable, or worsened. Formal visual fields were not available on enough patients to include them in this study. Only patients with documented preoperative vision deficits were considered to have potential for improvement. Additional outcomes were CSF leak, new postoperative pituitary dysfunction, return to operating room, and other complications.

Preoperative Clinical Variables

Demographic and clinical characteristics included age, sex, obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), prior surgery, preoperative vision impairment, and WHO pathological tumor grade.

Preoperative Radiographic Scoring

We first applied the UCSF scoring system, a 3-part score based on tumor size, optic canal invasion, and arterial encasement.20 The tumor size (diameter) score assigned 0 points for tumors ≤ 17 mm and 1 point for those > 17 mm. The canal invasion score assigned 0 points for no canal invasion, 1 point for unilateral invasion, and 2 points for bilateral invasion. Finally, the artery score assigned 0 points if the tumor does not touch, or simply abuts, the medial wall of the ICA or the anterior wall of the ACA, 1 point if < 180° around the artery, and 2 points if ≥ 180° but not completely around the artery.

We then tested additional radiographic variables that we hypothesized may be more specifically relevant to the EEA derived from the literature and our clinical experience. Based on our experience that ACA encasement is easier to manage than ICA encasement, we separately assigned an ACA and an ICA encasement score and added a possible score of 3 for complete encasement (360° encasement confirmed in > 1 MRI plane).

We then created a new “optic nerve laterality score” based on the maximal lateral extension of the tumor on the anterior skull base relative to the optic nerve on either side (Figs. 1 and 2). We assigned 0 points if the tumor was medial to the nerve, 1 point if it extended laterally < 50% over the nerve, 2 points if it extended ≥ 50% but < 100% laterally over the nerve, and 3 points if it extended past the lateral margin (≥ 100%) of the nerve. This score was assigned regardless of whether the tumor was superior or inferior to the nerve in its extension within or over the canal.

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Optic nerve laterality score. A: The optic nerve laterality score was determined based on the maximal lateral extension of the tumor on the anterior skull base relative to the optic nerve on either side. We assigned a score of 0 if the maximal lateral extension on either side was medial to the optic nerve; 1 if lateral < 50%; 2 if lateral ≥ 50% but < 100%; and 3 if it was completely (≥ 100%) lateral to the optic nerve. B: The optic nerve laterality score was measured on coronal MRI. The coronal image demonstrates lateral extension above the optic nerve at the bony edge of the optic canal on the anterior skull base. ***Optic nerve laterality score of 3 was associated with a significantly increased risk of not achieving GTR. Panel A: Copyright Matthew Holt. Published with permission.

FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Optic nerve laterality scores (superior view). An intracranial, superior-to-inferior view of SSMs in each category of the optic nerve laterality score. Scores were assigned as described in Fig. 1. ***Optic nerve laterality score of 3 was associated with a significantly increased risk of not achieving GTR. Copyright Matthew Holt. Published with permission.

We also scored anterior extension based on the maximal extension of the tumor on the skull base in the sagittal plane anterior to the limbus sphenoid, as well as maximal tumor diameter in any plane. Two authors (B.E.Y. and M.M.G.) independently rated preoperative images for the above criteria and the senior author (T.H.S.) arbitrated any disputes.

Statistical Analysis

All patients, including those in whom STR was anticipated, were included in an analysis to identify predictors of incomplete resection. Although we did not anticipate GTR in all cases, the goal was always maximal resection of as much tumor as the approach would allow, so residual tumor in these cases is informative of our scale. Continuous variables are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. Univariate analyses were performed with Fisher’s exact test for categorical data and Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous data. For multilevel scores, each increment was tested by univariate analysis. Significant factors in multivariable analysis were assigned 1 point each in the resectability score. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to assess the relationship between EOR and tumor recurrence or progression (IBM SPSS Statistics, version 25; IBM Corp.).

Results

Extent of Resection

Fifty-one patients who underwent EEA for SSMs were identified and included in the analysis. Radiographic GTR was achieved in 40 (78%) of 51 total patients and in 40 (85%) of 47 patients in whom it was the surgical goal (Table 1). Six patients had a radiographic NTR, and 3 patients with radiographic GTR were reclassified as NTR based on intraoperative microscopic residual, for a total of 9/51 (17.6%) NTRs (mean EOR 97.2% ± 1.9%, range 95%–99%). There were 4 STRs anticipated preoperatively. The primary surgical goal was maximal resection as well as decompression of the chiasm or separation of tumor from the optic apparatus and/or pituitary gland in preparation for radiation in the event of progression. No patients received immediate postoperative radiation or craniotomy. All were followed for progression. There was 1 unanticipated STR for a total of 5/51 (9.8%) STRs (mean EOR 77.4% ± 16.8%, range 49%–94%). The most common locations where residual tumors could be identified were either in the supraclinoid region lateral to the optic nerve on the PS (n = 7) or in the cavernous sinus with complete encasement of the carotid artery (n = 3).

TABLE 1.

Outcomes in 51 patients with SSMs

OutcomeValue (%)
Radiographic EOR*
 GTR (100%)40/47 (85.1)
 NTR (95–99%)6/47 (12.8)
 STR (<95%)1/47 (2.1)
Progression or recurrence9/51 (17.6)
 Recurrence after GTR1/37 (2.7)
 Progression after NTR4/9 (44.4)
 Progression after STR4/5 (80.0)
Management
 Radiation4
 Craniotomy3
 Monitoring2
Median follow-up in mos, range35.0, 0–132
Postop visual outcome
 Improved (preop deficit)31/46 (67.4)§
 Stable (preop deficit)12/46 (26.1)§
 Worse (all pts)3/51 (5.9)
Adverse events
 CSF leak5 (9.8)
 Infection6 (11.8)
 Long-term pituitary dysfunction
  Anterior2/49 (4.1)
  Posterior0/49 (0)
 Vascular injury1 (2)

pts = patients.

Radiographic EOR among patients in whom GTR was the surgical goal.

For purposes of the analysis identifying predictors of EOR, NTR includes 3 cases in which there was a radiographic GTR but the surgeon prospectively noted a small intraoperative residual (6 + 3 = 9).

For purposes of the analysis identifying predictors of EOR, STR includes 4 patients in whom GTR was not the surgical goal (1 + 4 = 5).

Among patients with a preoperative visual deficit and postoperative follow-up.

Two patients had preoperative pituitary dysfunction in multiple axes, one of whom experienced improvement postoperatively.

Significant risk factors for not achieving GTR in univariate analysis are presented in Table 2. These include prior surgery (OR 13.13, 95% CI 2.22–77.48, p = 0.003), tumor completely lateral to the optic nerve (laterality score of 3; OR 12.91, 95% CI 3.02–55.18, p < 0.0001), unilateral or bilateral canal invasion (UCSF canal score of 1 or 2 vs 0; OR 4.86, 95% CI 1.31–18.05, p = 0.017), and complete encasement of the ICA (Weill Cornell modified ICA score of 3; OR 14.4, 95% CI 1.44–143.71, p = 0.017). Many of these variables coexisted and it should be noted that of the 8 patients who had only canal invasion, all achieved a GTR.

TABLE 2.

Univariate analysis of risk factors for incomplete resection (STR or NTR—i.e., non-GTR) and calculation of the Weill Cornell SSM resectability score

VariableNo. of Pts (%)*Mean % EOR (± SD)No. w/ GTROR (non-GTR)95% CIp Value§
Total pts51
Clinical variables
 Age >60 yrs22 (43.1)96.7 ± 7.413 (59.1%)3.320.92–12.010.06
 Sex, female36 (70.6)98.4 ± 527 (75.0%)1.50.40–5.570.389
 Obesity21 (41.2)96.8 ± 7.614 (66.7%)1.640.48–5.680.318
 Prior surgery8 (15.7)93.7 ± 9.72 (25.0%)13.132.22–77.480.003
 WHO pathological tumor grade
  Grade I49 (96)97.3 ± 8.836 (73.5%)0.360.02–6.20.478
  Grade II or III2 (4.0)97.2 ± 41 (50%)Ref
 Peritumoral edema3 (5.9)99.6 ± 0.72 (66.7%)1.340.11–16.130.627
 Preop vision impairment47 (92.2)97.1 ± 8.633 (70.2%)NANANA
Radiographic variables
 Max tumor diam >2 cm21 (41.2)95.9 ± 11.814 (66.7%)1.90.5–7.20.265
 Anterior extension >10 mm18 (35.3)97.8 ± 712 (66.7%)1.560.44–5.520.352
 UCSF tumor diam score
  1, <17 mm22 (43.1)97.7 ± 6.416 (72.7%)Ref
  2, ≥17 mm29 (56.9)97 ± 1021 (72.4%)1.020.29–3.510.617
 UCSF canal invasion score
  0, none32 (62.7)97.4 ± 9.727 (84.4%)Ref
  1, unilat10 (19.6)95.4 ± 94 (40%)6.11.4–27.20.018
  2, bilat9 (17.6)99.1 ± 1.76 (66.7%)1.410.3–6.620.692
  1 or 2, any canal invasion19 (37.2)97.3 ± 8.610 (52.6%)4.861.31–18.050.017
 WC ICA encasement score
  0, none9 (17.6)99.6 ± 1.38 (88.9%)Ref
  1, <50%17 (33.3)98 ± 7.113 (76.5%)0.730.19–2.820.749
  2, ≥50%20 (39.2)99.2 ± 1.815 (75%)0.820.23–2.911
  3, complete—100%5 (9.8)83.5 ± 20.91 (20.0%)14.41.44–143.710.017
 WC ACA score
  0, none27 (52.9)96.4 ± 10.419 (70.4%)Ref
  1, <50%13 (25.5)99.6 ± 1.412 (92.3%)0.160.02–1.370.082
  2, ≥50%6 (11.8)94.8 ± 124 (66.7%)1.380.22–8.490.661
  3, complete—100%5 (9.8)99.3 ± 0.92 (40.0%)4.770.71–32.330.12
 WC optic nerve laterality score
  0, medial7 (13.7)99.4 ± 1.56 (85.7%)Ref
  1, <50%12 (23.5)99.5 ± 1.611 (91.7%)0.180.02–1.560.142
  2, 50–99%16 (31.4)99.9 ± 0.314 (87.5%)0.270.05–1.410.176
  3, ≥100%16 (31.4)92.2 ± 14.36 (37.5%)12.913.02–55.18<0.0001
Continuous variablesTotalGTRNon-GTRp Value**
Age in yrs, mean ± SD57 (range 21–84)53.85 ± 14.8462.02 ± 18.590.069
BMI in kg/m2, mean ± SD29.3 ± 7.128.95 ± 7.5330.23 ± 5.880.416
Tumor diam in mm, mean ± SD22.5 ± 7.621.8 ± 6.724.4 ± 9.70.216

Diam = diameter; max = maximal; NA = not applicable; Ref = reference value; WC = Weill Cornell.

Percentages calculated by column.

Percentages calculated by row.

For purposes of analysis, GTR refers to those patients who received a radiographic and surgical GTR. Patients with a radiographic STR (<95%) or NTR (95%–99%) and/or those in whom the surgeon prospectively noted leaving a small amount of residual were classified as non-GTR. The OR is for non-GTR relative to GTR.

Fisher’s exact test; boldface type indicates significance (p < 0.05).

All patients with non-GTR had vision impairment.

Kruskal-Wallis test.

In multivariable analysis (Table 3), significant independent risk factors were prior surgery (OR 25.94, 95% CI < 2.00 to 336.49, p = 0.013), tumor completely lateral to the optic nerve (i.e., optic laterality score of 3; OR 13.41, 95% CI 1.82–98.99, p = 0.011), and complete ICA encasement (i.e., ICA encasement score of 3; OR 15.12, 95% CI 1.17–194.08, p = 0.037). Each significant variable was assigned 1 point in the new resectability score for a maximum possible score of 3. Canal invasion approached but did not reach statistical significance (OR 6.41, 95% CI 0.87–47.23, p = 0.068). Figure 3 demonstrates the numbers of GTR and incomplete resection at each level of the score and the ability of the score to predict EOR with high confidence. A score of 0 had a positive predictive value of 97% for GTR, whereas a score of 2 had a negative predictive value of 87.5%.

TABLE 3.

Multivariable analysis and resectability score in patients with SSMs

VariableOR*95% CIp ValueScore Points
Prior surgery25.942–336.490.0131
Unilat or bilat canal invasion
 UCSF canal invasion score 1, 2 (vs 0)6.410.87–47.230.0680
Complete ICA encasement
 WC ICA encasement score 3 (vs 0, 1, 2)15.121.17–194.080.0371
Extension >100% lateral to optic nerve
 WC optic nerve laterality score 3 (vs 0, 1, 2)13.411.82–98.990.0111

The OR is for non-GTR relative to GTR.

Multivariable logistic regression; boldface type indicates significance (p < 0.05).

FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

EOR by the Weill Cornell resectability score. The number of patients in whom GTR and non-GTR was achieved is stratified by the Weill Cornell resectability score. A score of 0 had a positive predictive value of 97% for GTR, whereas a score of 2 had a negative predictive value of 87.5%.

Recurrence and Progression

After a mean follow-up of 40.6 ± 32.4 months, recurrence was 2.7% after GTR, 44.4% after NTR, and 80% after STR. GTR was strongly associated with a lower rate of recurrence or progression (HR 0.057, 95% CI 0.01–0.46, p < 0.0001) (Fig. 4). The one recurrence after GTR occurred 38 months after surgery, and was located just below the optic nerve, where there was no canal invasion on preoperative MRI. The patient underwent a supraorbital craniotomy for GTR without complication. Pathological investigation revealed that the tumor had transformed into an atypical meningioma (grade 2). Four of 9 patients with NTR had progression at the site of the residual; 2 were managed with craniotomy and 2 with fractionated external-beam radiation therapy. Four of 5 patients with STR had progression; 2 were managed with fractionated external-beam radiation therapy and 2 continued to be monitored without deficit.

FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Progression-free survival by EOR. Progression-free survival after radiographic and surgical GTR (100%), NTR (95%–99% radiographic resection and/or small residual tumor noted intraoperatively), and STR (< 95%). Hash marks represent censored data due to the end of the follow-up period for each patient. Log-rank test, p < 0.0001. Figure is available in color online only.

No patients received upfront adjuvant treatment. In all cases with residual tumor, decompression of critical structures was achieved and patients were monitored for progression with serial imaging. Recurrence and progression were managed on an individualized basis considering factors such as location, symptoms, age and comorbidity, and prior treatments and recurrence preceding EEA.

Visual Outcomes

Of 46 patients with preoperative visual deficits and postoperative follow-up, vision was stable or improved in 43 (93.5%) and improved in 31 (67.4%). Four patients did not have preoperative deficits and 1 international patient was excluded due to early loss to follow-up after discharge. Of the 51 patients in the series, 3 (5.9%) had postoperative declines. Univariate and multivariable analysis found no independent risk factors for lack of vision improvement.

Complications

Five patients had postoperative CSF leaks (9.8%), which occurred between postoperative days 2 and 12; 4 cases were successfully managed with additional lumbar drainage and antibiotics. One patient, who was too obese for upfront spinal drain placement, experienced a CSF leak on postoperative day 4 and was taken back to the operating room for cutdown lumbar drain placement. His leak continued on postoperative day 5 and he was taken back to the operating room to replace the gasket seal, which appeared to have dislodged during an episode of vomiting.

Three other patients returned to the operating room in the immediate postoperative period for visual loss; two improved with repositioning of the graft and the third improved with hypervolemic, hypertensive therapy.

Two patients (4%) had long-term anterior pituitary dysfunction (1 adrenocorticotropic hormone [ACTH] and 1 ACTH and thyroid). There were no cases of permanent diabetes insipidus. There was 1 vascular injury (2%) to the A1 segment of the ACA and 1 delayed subdural hematoma, which was drained 47 days after surgery. Postoperatively, lumbar drains were removed after a median of 2 days (IQR 1–3 days).

Discussion

In this paper we present a simple grading scheme for determining resectability of PS and TS meningiomas via an EEA. The most critical factors are the extent of the tumor lateral to the optic nerve, complete encasement of the ICA, and prior surgery. The presence of two of these risk factors portends an 87.5% chance of incomplete resection, whereas GTR was achieved in 97% of patients with none of these specific factors. By comparison, the UCSF cumulative score includes variables that were not significantly associated with incomplete resection and does not offer a simple way of predicting the likelihood of GTR. Contrary to what has been previously published, the absolute size of the tumor, medial optic canal involvement, ACA or partial ICA encasement, and brain edema were not predictive of resectability. Moreover, we demonstrate that for these meningiomas, recurrence rates can be projected based on the combination of radiographic EOR and microscopic inspection. Because Simpson grading is difficult to apply to cases treated with an EEA, given the inability to accurately assess the extent of the possible lateral or anterior margins of the dural tail from below, the combination of radiographic GTR and absence of microscopic residual can serve as a reasonable substitute for a Simpson grade 1, particularly because the EEA by design removes the involved bone and dura during the approach.

Rationale for the EEA for PS and TS Meningiomas

Overall outcomes in our series were favorable and further support the use of EEA to manage PS and TS meningiomas. For cases in which GTR was the surgical goal, we report an 85% (40/47) radiographic GTR and a 79% (37/47) microscopic rate of GTR, which compares favorably with the published EEA rates, ranging from 50% to 90% (Table 4).6–11 More importantly, the GTR rates are competitive with TCAs, which have been shown to achieve GTR in 84.1% (range 40%–90%) of cases.48,49 The real advantage of EEAs over TCAs is the visual outcome (Table 4), which has been demonstrated in numerous systematic literature reviews,6–11 and our data support this concept. We report long-term visual deterioration rates of only 6%, which also compare favorably with TCAs that result in visual deterioration in 14.2%.49

TABLE 4.

Literature review of the EEA for SSMs

Authors & YearNo. of PtsMean Tumor Vol (cm3)Mean Max Diam (cm)EORVisual OutcomeCSF LeakPostop Endocrine AbnormalityOther ComplicationsRecurrence After GTR; Progression After NTR or STRFollow-Up Period (mos)
Kitano et al., 200734167.5NAGTR: NA (mean EOR 98.5%)(+): 13/16 (81%); (-): 6/16 (38%)*2/16 (13%)0 (0%)2 (13%) asymptomatic perforating artery infarctNA≥3
de Divitiis et al., 2008357NANAGTR: 6/7 (85.7%)(+): 5/7 (71%); (-): 0/7 (0%)2/7 (29%)1 (14%) permanent DI1 (14%) IVH, deathNARange 3 wks–20 mos
Fatemi et al., 20093614NA2.5GTR: 7/14 (50%); NTR: 3/14 (21%); STR: 4/14 (29%)(+): 9/11 (82%); (-): 1/14 (7%)4/14 (29%)5 (36%); 1 new permanent adrenal insufficiency, 2 delayed hyponatremia, 2 transient DI2 (14%) revision for excessively large fat graft; 2 (14%) IMA embolization for delayed epistaxisR: 0/7 (0%); P: 1/7 (14%)Mean 32.3; median 27.5; range 6–65
Wang et al., 201037127.73.1GTR: 11/12 (92%)(+): 11/12 (92%); (-): 0/12 (0%)1/12 (8%)1 (8%) transient DINRNAMean 25.2; median 28; range 6–60
Van Gompel et al., 20113813NA2.4GTR: 7/13 (54%)(+): 8/12 (67%); (-): 0/12 (0%)0/13 (0%)NA1 (8%) ACA injury stroke, RLE hemiparesisNAMean 13; median 8; range 0–65
Bohman et al., 2012395NA2.0GTR: 4/5 (80%)(+): 4/5 (80%); (-): 0/5 (0%)1/5 (20%)2 (40%) transient DINR0Mean 7.8; median 6.9; range 2.2–17.0
Ogawa & Tominaga, 201240192.20.4GTR: 15/19 (79%)(+): 14/19 (74%); (-): 2/19 (11%)1/19 (5%)0 (0%)NRR: 1/15 (6.7%)Mean 35.8; range 6–59
Chowdhury et al., 2012416NA3.5GTR: 5/6 (83%)(+): 2/6 (33%); (-): 1/6 (17%)1/6 (17%)2 (33%) transient hyponatremiaNRR: 0/5 (0%); P: 0/1 (0%)Mean 7; median 7; range 2–12
Gadgil et al., 20134256.32.0GTR: 4/5 (80%)(+): 2/2 (100%); (-): 0/5 (0%)1/5 (20%), meningitis3/5 (60%) transient DINRR: 0/4 (0%); P: NAMean 15; range 3–27
Ottenhausen et al., 2014232012.0NAGTR: 16/20 (80%)(+): 14/17 (82%); (-): 0/20 (0%)2/20 (10%); 0/12 (0%) post-NSF2/20 (10%) transient DI1 (5%) deathR: 0/16 (0%); P: 2/4 (50%)Mean 51.5; range 5–96
Khan et al., 201443175.12.3GTR: 11/17 (65%)(+): 9/14 (65%); (-): 0/14 (0%)2/17 (12%)3/17 (18%); 1 permanent hypopituitarism, 2 transient DINRR: 0/11 (0%); P: 1/6 (16.7%)Mean 9.4; median 6; range 3–26
Koutourousiou et al., 20141975NA2.3GTR: 57/75 (76%)(+): 48/56 (86%); (-): 2/75 (3%)19/75 (25%); 10/62 (16%) post-NSF5/75 (6.5%); 1 permanent DI, 4 SIADH1 (1%) infarct (Heubner)R: 1/57 (1.8%); P: 3/18 (16.7%)Mean 29; median 19; range 1–98
Ceylan et al., 20154423NA2.5GTR: 17/23 (74%)(+): 14/20 (70%); (-): 0/23 (0%)2/23 (9%)2/23 (9%); 1 permanent DI, 1 transient DINRNANA; range 2–70
Hayhurst et al., 2016459NA2.5GTR: 6/9 (67%); NTR: 1/9 (11%); STR: 2/9 (22%)(+): 0/9 (0%); (-): 0/9 (0%)0/9 (0%)NA1 (11%) infarct (ACA lt frontal lobe)NANA
Linsler et al., 20172262.1 ± 0.8NAGTR: 5/6 (83%)(+): 2/6 (33%); (-): 1/6 (17%)0/6 (0%)0/6 (0%)NRR: 1/5 (20%); P: 0/1 (0%)Mean 15.3; range 3–60
Bernat et al., 20184620NANAGTR: 15/20 (75%)(+): NA; (-): NANANANAR: 1/15 (6.7%); P: NAMean 38
Song et al., 201847445.8 ± 3.42.5GTR: 37/44 (84%)(+): 43/44 (98%); (-): 1/44 (2%)1/44 (2%)3/44 (7%) transient DINRR: 5/37 (14%); P: 1/7 (14%)Median 27; range 0–54
Elshazly et al., 201821255.3NAGTR 19/25 (76%); NTR: 3/25 (12%); STR: 3/25 (12%)(+): 15/17 (88%); (-): 4/16 (25%)2/25 (8%)3/25 (12%) transient DI1 (4%) SAH, hydrocephalus, EVDR: 0/19 (0%); P: 1/6 (17%)Mean 21; range 1–53
Magill et al., 20182044NANANANANANANANAMean 45.7; median 29; range 0–174
Present study514.9 ± 4.42.3 ± 0.8Radiographic—GTR: 40/47 (85%); NTR: 6/47 (13%); STR: 1/47 (2%). Microscopic—GTR: 37/47 (79%); NTR: 9/47 (19%); STR: 1/47 (2%)(+): 31/47 (65.9); (-): 3/51(5.9)5/51 (10%)2/49 (4%) anterior dysfunction; 3/49 transient DI1 vascular injury; 1 delayed SDHR: 1/37 (2.7%); P: 8/14 (57%)Mean 40.6; median 35.9; range 0–132

DI = diabetes insipidus; EVD = external ventricular drain; IMA = internal maxillary artery; IVH = intraventricular hemorrhage; NA = not available; NR = not reported; NSF = nasoseptal flap; P = progression; R = recurrence; RLE = right lower extremity; SAH = subarachnoid hemorrhage; SDH = subdural hematoma; SIADH = syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone; + = visual improvement; - = visual deterioration.

Study reported objective visual testing and outcomes as improvement or deterioration in at least 1 eye.

Bernat et al. (2018)46 may include patients from Khan et al. (2014).43 Both series are included because different outcomes of interest are reported.

However, the last piece of the puzzle has always been long-term outcome data and the inability for surgeons who perform the EEA to reliably report the Simpson grade of their patients. If recurrence rates are significantly higher following EEA than following transcranial surgery, absent radiation, then the visual outcome advantages may not be justified. Although Simpson grading has always been the gold standard in determining EOR for meningiomas, the scale was developed in 1957 before EOR could be determined with postoperative MRI scans and before microscopic inspection of the tumor bed was possible.50 It is well documented that a surgeon’s estimate of EOR is not as accurate as postoperative MRI scans and it is intuitive that the microscope would be able to visualize tumor below the resolution of the naked eye or even loupes.51 Likewise, after the introduction of stereotactic radiation to the treatment of meningiomas we can infer that a partially resected tumor that responds to radiation may never recur, rendering the EOR irrelevant in this situation and potentially not worth the increased risk that a radical resection might incur. For these reasons, the utility of the Simpson grading at predicting recurrence has been questioned for skull base meningiomas.31–33

In this paper we demonstrate that EEA in well-selected cases, in which a radiographic GTR is achieved with no residual microscopic disease, results in a durable response with a very low rate of recurrence. Thus, the key decision that must be made by the operating surgeon is whether a particular tumor is amenable to EEA and if GTR can be achieved with a high degree of reliability. For this reason, we have developed a grading scale that can be used to choose cases based on preoperative imaging and historical data.

Predictors of STR

In the early days of EEA for meningiomas, several criteria were discussed that might lead to STR including tumor size, brain edema, presence of a “cortical cuff,” and proximity to intracranial vasculature.52 As surgeons have become more adept, none of these factors are still considered absolute contraindications to EEA, and in fact in this paper we show that they are not reliable predictors of STR.

In validating the UCSF score, Magill et al.20 reported that unilateral canal invasion and, to a greater extent, bilateral invasion appear to limit GTR. However, this was based on a combined series of patients who underwent EEA and TCA, so it was not clear which approach was more apt to leave tumor in this location. In our experience, the medial canal is actually easier to decompress via an EEA than through a craniotomy. Our results support that the midline EEA offers equal access to unilateral or bilateral invasion,53 and neither is independently predictive of incomplete resection. Figure 5A and B demonstrates an example of significant bilateral canal invasion in which GTR was achieved. All TS meningiomas probably have some degree of optic canal invasion,54 and other experienced centers have also reported that canal invasion does not limit the EOR.19,21 By comparison, the TCA typically approaches the tumor from one side, limiting visualization of the ipsilateral medial optic canal.6,7,46

FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Examples of GTR with bilateral optic canal invasion, incomplete ICA encasement, and complete ACA encasement. A and B: Preoperative coronal T2-weighted MR image (A) demonstrates significant bilateral optical canal invasion and a Weill Cornell optic nerve laterality score of 2, and postoperative T2-weighted MR image (B) reveals GTR. C and D: Preoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (C) demonstrates incomplete (> 50% but < 99%) intracavernous ICA encasement (Weill Cornell ICA score of 2), and postoperative T1-weighted MR image with contrast (D) reveals GTR. E and F: Preoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (E) demonstrates complete encasement of the bilateral ACAs (Weill Cornell ACA score of 3), and postoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (F) demonstrates GTR.

As we show in this manuscript, the relationship between the tumor and the optic nerve is critically important, but only if the tumor extends lateral to the optic nerve, because EEA generally provides limited visualization and access to this area (Fig. 2). Magill et al.20 found that lateral tumor diameter was not associated with EOR, but we found that specifically looking at the relationship to the optic nerve was important with the EEA. Opening the medial optic canal allows for tumor removal within the canal and directly above the nerve, but the optic nerves may limit visualization on the far side of the nerve, just as the medial nerve is difficult to access through a TCA. The anterior clinoid has previously been described as a likely location for residual tumor,46 and we generally prefer TCA for tumors with significant extension over the clinoid.24

The relationship between the tumor and the surrounding vasculature has also been discussed as a potential factor limiting resectability. This idea was first conceived as a requirement for a “cortical cuff” to encircle the tumor as a safety buffer between the tumor and the arteries.55 Other series have suggested that cavernous sinus invasion, partial encasement of the ICA, or lateral extension beyond the ICA limit GTR.20,22,40,46 Koutourousiou et al.19 found vascular encasement (degree and vessel unspecified) to be strongly associated with incomplete resection. We previously demonstrated that the lack of a cortical cuff is not predictive of STR.52 In this study, we further refine the limitation posed by neighboring vasculature and demonstrate that ACA encasement is less important than ICA encasement and that only complete 360° ICA encasement is a true limitation to achieving GTR. The UCSF score does not differentiate between ICA and ACA encasement or partial and complete encasement. The ACA encasement or lesser degrees of ICA involvement captured in the UCSF scale do not preclude complete resection with the EEA (Fig. 5C–F).20 We were able to achieve GTR in the majority of cases involving surrounding vasculature so long as there was not complete encasement of the ICA.

The last predictor, prior surgery, was also independently associated with incomplete resection in our series. Prior surgery, as well as subsequent radiation, can lead to scarring and loss of arachnoid planes, making tumors more difficult to resect. This factor becomes critically important if one is choosing between radiation and surgery for an asymptomatic but enlarging tumor recurrence, because reoperation may be less successful than a first-time operation, which may encourage the use of radiation in these cases. Prior surgery was not included in the UCSF score.

Adverse Events

Our CSF leak rate of 9.8% (5/51) is reasonable for this high-risk population and is in the lower end of the 0%–29% rate reported in the recent literature (Table 4). Of note, 4 of 5 leaks were controlled with lumbar drainage. In the one patient who required reoperation, morbid obesity prevented initial placement of the lumbar drain. Although the use of lumbar drains remains controversial in this population, we continue to advocate their use in these high-risk patients, particularly in light of our own published data as well as randomized studies showing efficacy for patients with high-risk leaks.56,57

Limitations of the Study

As with any single-surgeon retrospective series, there are several limitations to our study. Case selection inherently represents institutional bias.24 There also remains the possibility of confounding by unmeasured variables. Our follow-up, albeit on average longer than in most EEA meningioma series, may be inadequate to reveal the actual rate of 10-year recurrence-free survival for these slow-growing tumors. Longer follow-up in larger series of patients will be required to validate our results. Finally, findings may not be generalizable outside of our center.

Conclusions

The EEA is a safe and effective approach to SSMs and has favorable visual outcomes in well-selected cases. The combination of radiographic GTR with direct endoscopic inspection dramatically reduces the chance of recurrence and can be used in lieu of Simpson grade to predict recurrence. Risk factors for incomplete resection include prior surgery, tumor lateral to the optic nerve, and complete ICA encasement. A simple, 3-item resectability score based on these findings can be used to predict patients in whom GTR can be achieved.

Disclosures

The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this paper.

Author Contributions

Conception and design: Schwartz, Youngerman, Tabaee, Kacker, Anand. Acquisition of data: Schwartz, Youngerman, Gerges, Odigie. Analysis and interpretation of data: Schwartz, Youngerman, Banu, Gerges, Odigie. Drafting the article: Schwartz, Youngerman, Banu. Critically revising the article: Schwartz, Youngerman. Reviewed submitted version of manuscript: all authors. Approved the final version of the manuscript on behalf of all authors: Schwartz. Statistical analysis: Schwartz, Youngerman, Banu. Administrative/technical/material support: Schwartz, Youngerman. Study supervision: Schwartz.

References

  • 1

    Mathiesen T , Kihlström L . Visual outcome of tuberculum sellae meningiomas after extradural optic nerve decompression . Neurosurgery . 2006 ;59 (3 ):570 576 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Ganna A , Dehdashti AR , Karabatsou K , Gentili F . Fronto-basal interhemispheric approach for tuberculum sellae meningiomas; long-term visual outcome . Br J Neurosurg . 2009 ;23 (4 ):422 430 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Mahmoud M , Nader R , Al-Mefty O . Optic canal involvement in tuberculum sellae meningiomas: influence on approach, recurrence, and visual recovery . Neurosurgery . 2010 ;67 (3 )(Suppl Operative ):ons108 ons119 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Nanda A , Ambekar S , Javalkar V , Sharma M . Technical nuances in the management of tuberculum sellae and diaphragma sellae meningiomas . Neurosurg Focus . 2013 ;35 (6 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Karsy M , Raheja A , Eli I , et al. Clinical outcomes with transcranial resection of the tuberculum sellae meningioma . World Neurosurg . 2017 ;108 :748 755 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Wang EW , Gardner PA , Zanation AM . International consensus statement on endoscopic skull-base surgery: executive summary . Int Forum Allergy Rhinol . 2019 ;9 (S3 ):S127 S144 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Graffeo CS , Dietrich AR , Grobelny B , et al. A panoramic view of the skull base: systematic review of open and endoscopic endonasal approaches to four tumors . Pituitary . 2014 ;17 (4 ):349 356 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Shin M , Kondo K , Saito N . Current status of endoscopic endonasal surgery for skull base meningiomas: review of the literature . Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) . 2015 ;55 (9 ):735 743 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Turel MK , Tsermoulas G , Reddy D , et al. Endonasal endoscopic transsphenoidal excision of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a systematic review . J Neurosurg Sci . 2016 ;60 (4 ):463 475 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Clark AJ , Jahangiri A , Garcia RM , et al. Endoscopic surgery for tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Neurosurg Rev . 2013 ;36 (3 ):349 359 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Muskens IS , Briceno V , Ouwehand TL , et al. The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis . Acta Neurochir (Wien) . 2018 ;160 (1 ):59 75 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Garcia-Navarro V , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . Gasket seal closure for extended endonasal endoscopic skull base surgery: efficacy in a large case series . World Neurosurg . 2013 ;80 (5 ):563 568 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    McCoul ED , Anand VK , Singh A , et al. Long-term effectiveness of a reconstructive protocol using the nasoseptal flap after endoscopic skull base surgery . World Neurosurg . 2014 ;81 (1 ):136 143 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Patel KS , Komotar RJ , Szentirmai O , et al. Case-specific protocol to reduce cerebrospinal fluid leakage after endonasal endoscopic surgery . J Neurosurg . 2013 ;119 (3 ):661 668 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Makarenko S , Carreras EM , Akagami R . Craniotomy for perisellar meningiomas: comparison of simple (appropriate for endoscopic approach) versus complex anatomy and surgical outcomes . J Neurosurg . 2017 ;126 (4 ):1191 1200 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Bander ED , Singh H , Ogilvie CB , et al. Endoscopic endonasal versus transcranial approach to tuberculum sellae and planum sphenoidale meningiomas in a similar cohort of patients . J Neurosurg . 2018 ;128 (1 ):40 48 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Mortazavi MM , Brito da Silva H , Ferreira M Jr , et al. Planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae meningiomas: operative nuances of a modern surgical technique with outcome and proposal of a new classification system . World Neurosurg . 2016 ;86 :270 286 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Kshettry VR , Elshazly K , Evans JJ . Endoscopic transnasal surgery for planum and tuberculum sella meningiomas: decision-making, technique and outcomes . CNS Oncol . 2016 ;5 (4 ):211 222 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Koutourousiou M , Fernandez-Miranda JC , Stefko ST , et al. Endoscopic endonasal surgery for suprasellar meningiomas: experience with 75 patients . J Neurosurg . 2014 ;120 (6 ):1326 1339 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Magill ST , Morshed RA , Lucas CG , et al. Tuberculum sellae meningiomas: grading scale to assess surgical outcomes using the transcranial versus transsphenoidal approach . Neurosurg Focus . 2018 ;44 (4 ):E9 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Elshazly K , Kshettry VR , Farrell CJ , et al. Clinical outcome after endoscopic endonasal resection of tuberculum sella meningiomas . Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) . 2018 ;14 (5 ):494 502 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Linsler S , Fischer G , Skliarenko V , et al. Endoscopic assisted supraorbital keyhole approach or endoscopic endonasal approach in cases of tuberculum sellae meningioma: which surgical route should be favored? World Neurosurg . 2017 ;104 :601 611 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Ottenhausen M , Banu MA , Placantonakis DG , et al. Endoscopic endonasal resection of suprasellar meningiomas: the importance of case selection and experience in determining extent of resection, visual improvement, and complications . World Neurosurg . 2014 ;82 (3–4 ):442 449 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Ottenhausen M , Rumalla K , Alalade AF , et al. Decision-making algorithm for minimally invasive approaches to anterior skull base meningiomas . Neurosurg Focus . 2018 ;44 (4 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    von Elm E , Altman DG , Egger M , et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies . Lancet . 2007 ;370 (9596 ):1453 1457 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Kulwin C , Schwartz TH , Cohen-Gadol AA . Endoscopic extended transsphenoidal resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: nuances of neurosurgical technique . Neurosurg Focus . 2013 ;35 (6 ):E6 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Leng LZ , Brown S , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . “Gasket-seal” watertight closure in minimal-access endoscopic cranial base surgery . Neurosurgery . 2008 ;62 (5 )(suppl 2 ):E342 E343 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Luginbuhl AJ , Campbell PG , Evans J , Rosen M . Endoscopic repair of high-flow cranial base defects using a bilayer button . Laryngoscope . 2010 ;120 (5 ):876 880 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Nyquist GG , Anand VK , Singh A , Schwartz TH . Janus flap: bilateral nasoseptal flaps for anterior skull base reconstruction . Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 2010 ;142 (3 ):327 331 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Placantonakis DG , Tabaee A , Anand VK , et al. Safety of low-dose intrathecal fluorescein in endoscopic cranial base surgery . Neurosurgery . 2007 ;61 (3 )(suppl):161 166 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Oya S , Kawai K , Nakatomi H , Saito N . Significance of Simpson grading system in modern meningioma surgery: integration of the grade with MIB-1 labeling index as a key to predict the recurrence of WHO Grade I meningiomas . J Neurosurg . 2012 ;117 (1 ):121 128 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Otero-Rodriguez A , Tabernero MD , Munoz-Martin MC , et al. Re-evaluating Simpson grade I, II, and III resections in neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization grade I meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2016 ;96 :483 488 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33

    Sughrue ME , Kane AJ , Shangari G , et al. The relevance of Simpson Grade I and II resection in modern neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization Grade I meningiomas . J Neurosurg . 2010 ;113 (5 ):1029 1035 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Kitano M , Taneda M , Nakao Y . Postoperative improvement in visual function in patients with tuberculum sellae meningiomas: results of the extended transsphenoidal and transcranial approaches . J Neurosurg . 2007 ;107 (2 ):337 346 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35

    de Divitiis E , Esposito F , Cappabianca P , et al. Tuberculum sellae meningiomas: high route or low route? A series of 51 consecutive cases . Neurosurgery . 2008 ;62 (3 ):556 563 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36

    Fatemi N , Dusick JR , de Paiva Neto MA , et al. Endonasal versus supraorbital keyhole removal of craniopharyngiomas and tuberculum sellae meningiomas . Neurosurgery . 2009 ;64 (5 )(suppl 2 ):269 286 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37

    Wang Q , Lu XJ , Ji WY , et al. Visual outcome after extended endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery for tuberculum sellae meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2010 ;73 (6 ):694 700 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38

    Van Gompel JJ , Frank G , Pasquini E , et al. Expanded endonasal endoscopic resection of anterior fossa meningiomas: report of 13 cases and meta-analysis of the literature . Neurosurg Focus . 2011 ;30 (5 ):E15 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39

    Bohman L-E , Stein SC , Newman JG , et al. Endoscopic versus open resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a decision analysis . ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec . 2012 ;74 (5 ):255 263 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40

    Ogawa Y , Tominaga T . Extended transsphenoidal approach for tuberculum sellae meningioma—what are the optimum and critical indications? Acta Neurochir (Wien) . 2012 ;154 (4 ):621 626 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41

    Chowdhury FH , Haque MR , Goel AH , Kawsar KA . Endoscopic endonasal extended transsphenoidal removal of tuberculum sellae meningioma (TSM): an experience of six cases . Br J Neurosurg . 2012 ;26 (5 ):692 699 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42

    Gadgil N , Thomas JG , Takashima M , Yoshor D . Endoscopic resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas . J Neurol Surg B Skull Base . 2013 ;74 (4 ):201 210 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43

    Khan OH , Krischek B , Holliman D , et al. Pure endoscopic expanded endonasal approach for olfactory groove and tuberculum sellae meningiomas . J Clin Neurosci . 2014 ;21 (6 ):927 933 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44

    Ceylan S , Anik I , Koc K , Cabuk B . Extended endoscopic transsphenoidal approach infrachiasmatic corridor . Neurosurg Rev . 2015 ;38 (1 ):137 147 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45

    Hayhurst C , Sughrue ME , Gore PA , et al. Results with expanded endonasal resection of skull base meningiomas technical nuances and approach selection based on an early experience . Turk Neurosurg . 2016 ;26 (5 ):662 670 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46

    Bernat AL , Priola SM , Elsawy A , et al. Recurrence of anterior skull base meningiomas after endoscopic endonasal resection: 10 years’ experience in a series of 52 endoscopic and transcranial cases . World Neurosurg . 2018 ;120 :e107 e113 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47

    Song SW , Kim YH , Kim JW , et al. Outcomes after transcranial and endoscopic endonasal approach for tuberculum meningiomas—a retrospective comparison . World Neurosurg . 2018 ;109 :e434 e445 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48

    Schwartz TH , Morgenstern PF , Anand VK . Lessons learned in the evolution of endoscopic skull base surgery . J Neurosurg . 2019 ;130 (2 ):337 346 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49

    Komotar RJ , Starke RM , Raper DMS , et al. Endoscopic endonasal versus open transcranial resection of anterior midline skull base meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2012 ;77 (5-6 ):713 724 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 50

    Simpson D . The recurrence of intracranial meningiomas after surgical treatment . J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry . 1957 ;20 (1 ):22 39 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51

    Alhilali LM , Little AS , Yuen KCJ , et al. Early postoperative MRI and detection of residual adenoma after transsphenoidal pituitary surgery . J Neurosurg. Published online February 7 , 2020 . doi:10.3171/2019.11.JNS191845

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52

    Khan OH , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . Endoscopic endonasal resection of skull base meningiomas: the significance of a “cortical cuff” and brain edema compared with careful case selection and surgical experience in predicting morbidity and extent of resection . Neurosurg Focus . 2014 ;37 (4 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 53

    Attia M , Kandasamy J , Jakimovski D , et al. The importance and timing of optic canal exploration and decompression during endoscopic endonasal resection of tuberculum sella and planum sphenoidale meningiomas . Neurosurgery . 2012 ;71 (1 )(Suppl Operative ):58 67 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 54

    Nimmannitya P , Goto T , Terakawa Y , et al. Characteristic of optic canal invasion in 31 consecutive cases with tuberculum sellae meningioma . Neurosurg Rev . 2016 ;39 (4 ):691 697 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 55

    Kassam AB , Prevedello DM , Carrau RL , et al. Endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery: analysis of complications in the authors’ initial 800 patients . J Neurosurg . 2011 ;114 (6 ):1544 1568 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 56

    Cohen S , Jones SH , Dhandapani S , et al. Lumbar drains decrease the risk of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak following endonasal endoscopic surgery for suprasellar meningiomas in patients with high body mass index . Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown). 2018 ;14 (1 ):66 71 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 57

    Zwagerman NT , Wang EW , Shin SS , et al. Does lumbar drainage reduce postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery? A prospective, randomized controlled trial . J Neurosurg . 2019 ;131 (4 ):1172 1178 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Illustrations from Marx and Schroeder (pp 318–326). Copyright Henry W. S. Schroeder. Published with permission.

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Theodore H. Schwartz: Weill Cornell Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY. schwarh@med.cornell.edu.

INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online July 24, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2020.4.JNS20475.

Disclosures The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this paper.

  • View in gallery

    Optic nerve laterality score. A: The optic nerve laterality score was determined based on the maximal lateral extension of the tumor on the anterior skull base relative to the optic nerve on either side. We assigned a score of 0 if the maximal lateral extension on either side was medial to the optic nerve; 1 if lateral < 50%; 2 if lateral ≥ 50% but < 100%; and 3 if it was completely (≥ 100%) lateral to the optic nerve. B: The optic nerve laterality score was measured on coronal MRI. The coronal image demonstrates lateral extension above the optic nerve at the bony edge of the optic canal on the anterior skull base. ***Optic nerve laterality score of 3 was associated with a significantly increased risk of not achieving GTR. Panel A: Copyright Matthew Holt. Published with permission.

  • View in gallery

    Optic nerve laterality scores (superior view). An intracranial, superior-to-inferior view of SSMs in each category of the optic nerve laterality score. Scores were assigned as described in Fig. 1. ***Optic nerve laterality score of 3 was associated with a significantly increased risk of not achieving GTR. Copyright Matthew Holt. Published with permission.

  • View in gallery

    EOR by the Weill Cornell resectability score. The number of patients in whom GTR and non-GTR was achieved is stratified by the Weill Cornell resectability score. A score of 0 had a positive predictive value of 97% for GTR, whereas a score of 2 had a negative predictive value of 87.5%.

  • View in gallery

    Progression-free survival by EOR. Progression-free survival after radiographic and surgical GTR (100%), NTR (95%–99% radiographic resection and/or small residual tumor noted intraoperatively), and STR (< 95%). Hash marks represent censored data due to the end of the follow-up period for each patient. Log-rank test, p < 0.0001. Figure is available in color online only.

  • View in gallery

    Examples of GTR with bilateral optic canal invasion, incomplete ICA encasement, and complete ACA encasement. A and B: Preoperative coronal T2-weighted MR image (A) demonstrates significant bilateral optical canal invasion and a Weill Cornell optic nerve laterality score of 2, and postoperative T2-weighted MR image (B) reveals GTR. C and D: Preoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (C) demonstrates incomplete (> 50% but < 99%) intracavernous ICA encasement (Weill Cornell ICA score of 2), and postoperative T1-weighted MR image with contrast (D) reveals GTR. E and F: Preoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (E) demonstrates complete encasement of the bilateral ACAs (Weill Cornell ACA score of 3), and postoperative coronal T1-weighted MR image with contrast (F) demonstrates GTR.

  • 1

    Mathiesen T , Kihlström L . Visual outcome of tuberculum sellae meningiomas after extradural optic nerve decompression . Neurosurgery . 2006 ;59 (3 ):570 576 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Ganna A , Dehdashti AR , Karabatsou K , Gentili F . Fronto-basal interhemispheric approach for tuberculum sellae meningiomas; long-term visual outcome . Br J Neurosurg . 2009 ;23 (4 ):422 430 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Mahmoud M , Nader R , Al-Mefty O . Optic canal involvement in tuberculum sellae meningiomas: influence on approach, recurrence, and visual recovery . Neurosurgery . 2010 ;67 (3 )(Suppl Operative ):ons108 ons119 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Nanda A , Ambekar S , Javalkar V , Sharma M . Technical nuances in the management of tuberculum sellae and diaphragma sellae meningiomas . Neurosurg Focus . 2013 ;35 (6 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Karsy M , Raheja A , Eli I , et al. Clinical outcomes with transcranial resection of the tuberculum sellae meningioma . World Neurosurg . 2017 ;108 :748 755 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Wang EW , Gardner PA , Zanation AM . International consensus statement on endoscopic skull-base surgery: executive summary . Int Forum Allergy Rhinol . 2019 ;9 (S3 ):S127 S144 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Graffeo CS , Dietrich AR , Grobelny B , et al. A panoramic view of the skull base: systematic review of open and endoscopic endonasal approaches to four tumors . Pituitary . 2014 ;17 (4 ):349 356 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Shin M , Kondo K , Saito N . Current status of endoscopic endonasal surgery for skull base meningiomas: review of the literature . Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) . 2015 ;55 (9 ):735 743 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Turel MK , Tsermoulas G , Reddy D , et al. Endonasal endoscopic transsphenoidal excision of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a systematic review . J Neurosurg Sci . 2016 ;60 (4 ):463 475 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Clark AJ , Jahangiri A , Garcia RM , et al. Endoscopic surgery for tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Neurosurg Rev . 2013 ;36 (3 ):349 359 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Muskens IS , Briceno V , Ouwehand TL , et al. The endoscopic endonasal approach is not superior to the microscopic transcranial approach for anterior skull base meningiomas—a meta-analysis . Acta Neurochir (Wien) . 2018 ;160 (1 ):59 75 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Garcia-Navarro V , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . Gasket seal closure for extended endonasal endoscopic skull base surgery: efficacy in a large case series . World Neurosurg . 2013 ;80 (5 ):563 568 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    McCoul ED , Anand VK , Singh A , et al. Long-term effectiveness of a reconstructive protocol using the nasoseptal flap after endoscopic skull base surgery . World Neurosurg . 2014 ;81 (1 ):136 143 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Patel KS , Komotar RJ , Szentirmai O , et al. Case-specific protocol to reduce cerebrospinal fluid leakage after endonasal endoscopic surgery . J Neurosurg . 2013 ;119 (3 ):661 668 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Makarenko S , Carreras EM , Akagami R . Craniotomy for perisellar meningiomas: comparison of simple (appropriate for endoscopic approach) versus complex anatomy and surgical outcomes . J Neurosurg . 2017 ;126 (4 ):1191 1200 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Bander ED , Singh H , Ogilvie CB , et al. Endoscopic endonasal versus transcranial approach to tuberculum sellae and planum sphenoidale meningiomas in a similar cohort of patients . J Neurosurg . 2018 ;128 (1 ):40 48 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Mortazavi MM , Brito da Silva H , Ferreira M Jr , et al. Planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae meningiomas: operative nuances of a modern surgical technique with outcome and proposal of a new classification system . World Neurosurg . 2016 ;86 :270 286 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Kshettry VR , Elshazly K , Evans JJ . Endoscopic transnasal surgery for planum and tuberculum sella meningiomas: decision-making, technique and outcomes . CNS Oncol . 2016 ;5 (4 ):211 222 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Koutourousiou M , Fernandez-Miranda JC , Stefko ST , et al. Endoscopic endonasal surgery for suprasellar meningiomas: experience with 75 patients . J Neurosurg . 2014 ;120 (6 ):1326 1339 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Magill ST , Morshed RA , Lucas CG , et al. Tuberculum sellae meningiomas: grading scale to assess surgical outcomes using the transcranial versus transsphenoidal approach . Neurosurg Focus . 2018 ;44 (4 ):E9 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Elshazly K , Kshettry VR , Farrell CJ , et al. Clinical outcome after endoscopic endonasal resection of tuberculum sella meningiomas . Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) . 2018 ;14 (5 ):494 502 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Linsler S , Fischer G , Skliarenko V , et al. Endoscopic assisted supraorbital keyhole approach or endoscopic endonasal approach in cases of tuberculum sellae meningioma: which surgical route should be favored? World Neurosurg . 2017 ;104 :601 611 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Ottenhausen M , Banu MA , Placantonakis DG , et al. Endoscopic endonasal resection of suprasellar meningiomas: the importance of case selection and experience in determining extent of resection, visual improvement, and complications . World Neurosurg . 2014 ;82 (3–4 ):442 449 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Ottenhausen M , Rumalla K , Alalade AF , et al. Decision-making algorithm for minimally invasive approaches to anterior skull base meningiomas . Neurosurg Focus . 2018 ;44 (4 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    von Elm E , Altman DG , Egger M , et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies . Lancet . 2007 ;370 (9596 ):1453 1457 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Kulwin C , Schwartz TH , Cohen-Gadol AA . Endoscopic extended transsphenoidal resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: nuances of neurosurgical technique . Neurosurg Focus . 2013 ;35 (6 ):E6 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Leng LZ , Brown S , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . “Gasket-seal” watertight closure in minimal-access endoscopic cranial base surgery . Neurosurgery . 2008 ;62 (5 )(suppl 2 ):E342 E343 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Luginbuhl AJ , Campbell PG , Evans J , Rosen M . Endoscopic repair of high-flow cranial base defects using a bilayer button . Laryngoscope . 2010 ;120 (5 ):876 880 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Nyquist GG , Anand VK , Singh A , Schwartz TH . Janus flap: bilateral nasoseptal flaps for anterior skull base reconstruction . Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 2010 ;142 (3 ):327 331 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Placantonakis DG , Tabaee A , Anand VK , et al. Safety of low-dose intrathecal fluorescein in endoscopic cranial base surgery . Neurosurgery . 2007 ;61 (3 )(suppl):161 166 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Oya S , Kawai K , Nakatomi H , Saito N . Significance of Simpson grading system in modern meningioma surgery: integration of the grade with MIB-1 labeling index as a key to predict the recurrence of WHO Grade I meningiomas . J Neurosurg . 2012 ;117 (1 ):121 128 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Otero-Rodriguez A , Tabernero MD , Munoz-Martin MC , et al. Re-evaluating Simpson grade I, II, and III resections in neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization grade I meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2016 ;96 :483 488 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33

    Sughrue ME , Kane AJ , Shangari G , et al. The relevance of Simpson Grade I and II resection in modern neurosurgical treatment of World Health Organization Grade I meningiomas . J Neurosurg . 2010 ;113 (5 ):1029 1035 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Kitano M , Taneda M , Nakao Y . Postoperative improvement in visual function in patients with tuberculum sellae meningiomas: results of the extended transsphenoidal and transcranial approaches . J Neurosurg . 2007 ;107 (2 ):337 346 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35

    de Divitiis E , Esposito F , Cappabianca P , et al. Tuberculum sellae meningiomas: high route or low route? A series of 51 consecutive cases . Neurosurgery . 2008 ;62 (3 ):556 563 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36

    Fatemi N , Dusick JR , de Paiva Neto MA , et al. Endonasal versus supraorbital keyhole removal of craniopharyngiomas and tuberculum sellae meningiomas . Neurosurgery . 2009 ;64 (5 )(suppl 2 ):269 286 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37

    Wang Q , Lu XJ , Ji WY , et al. Visual outcome after extended endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery for tuberculum sellae meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2010 ;73 (6 ):694 700 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38

    Van Gompel JJ , Frank G , Pasquini E , et al. Expanded endonasal endoscopic resection of anterior fossa meningiomas: report of 13 cases and meta-analysis of the literature . Neurosurg Focus . 2011 ;30 (5 ):E15 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39

    Bohman L-E , Stein SC , Newman JG , et al. Endoscopic versus open resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a decision analysis . ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec . 2012 ;74 (5 ):255 263 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40

    Ogawa Y , Tominaga T . Extended transsphenoidal approach for tuberculum sellae meningioma—what are the optimum and critical indications? Acta Neurochir (Wien) . 2012 ;154 (4 ):621 626 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41

    Chowdhury FH , Haque MR , Goel AH , Kawsar KA . Endoscopic endonasal extended transsphenoidal removal of tuberculum sellae meningioma (TSM): an experience of six cases . Br J Neurosurg . 2012 ;26 (5 ):692 699 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42

    Gadgil N , Thomas JG , Takashima M , Yoshor D . Endoscopic resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas . J Neurol Surg B Skull Base . 2013 ;74 (4 ):201 210 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43

    Khan OH , Krischek B , Holliman D , et al. Pure endoscopic expanded endonasal approach for olfactory groove and tuberculum sellae meningiomas . J Clin Neurosci . 2014 ;21 (6 ):927 933 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44

    Ceylan S , Anik I , Koc K , Cabuk B . Extended endoscopic transsphenoidal approach infrachiasmatic corridor . Neurosurg Rev . 2015 ;38 (1 ):137 147 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45

    Hayhurst C , Sughrue ME , Gore PA , et al. Results with expanded endonasal resection of skull base meningiomas technical nuances and approach selection based on an early experience . Turk Neurosurg . 2016 ;26 (5 ):662 670 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46

    Bernat AL , Priola SM , Elsawy A , et al. Recurrence of anterior skull base meningiomas after endoscopic endonasal resection: 10 years’ experience in a series of 52 endoscopic and transcranial cases . World Neurosurg . 2018 ;120 :e107 e113 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47

    Song SW , Kim YH , Kim JW , et al. Outcomes after transcranial and endoscopic endonasal approach for tuberculum meningiomas—a retrospective comparison . World Neurosurg . 2018 ;109 :e434 e445 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48

    Schwartz TH , Morgenstern PF , Anand VK . Lessons learned in the evolution of endoscopic skull base surgery . J Neurosurg . 2019 ;130 (2 ):337 346 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49

    Komotar RJ , Starke RM , Raper DMS , et al. Endoscopic endonasal versus open transcranial resection of anterior midline skull base meningiomas . World Neurosurg . 2012 ;77 (5-6 ):713 724 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 50

    Simpson D . The recurrence of intracranial meningiomas after surgical treatment . J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry . 1957 ;20 (1 ):22 39 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51

    Alhilali LM , Little AS , Yuen KCJ , et al. Early postoperative MRI and detection of residual adenoma after transsphenoidal pituitary surgery . J Neurosurg. Published online February 7 , 2020 . doi:10.3171/2019.11.JNS191845

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52

    Khan OH , Anand VK , Schwartz TH . Endoscopic endonasal resection of skull base meningiomas: the significance of a “cortical cuff” and brain edema compared with careful case selection and surgical experience in predicting morbidity and extent of resection . Neurosurg Focus . 2014 ;37 (4 ):E7 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 53

    Attia M , Kandasamy J , Jakimovski D , et al. The importance and timing of optic canal exploration and decompression during endoscopic endonasal resection of tuberculum sella and planum sphenoidale meningiomas . Neurosurgery . 2012 ;71 (1 )(Suppl Operative ):58 67 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 54

    Nimmannitya P , Goto T , Terakawa Y , et al. Characteristic of optic canal invasion in 31 consecutive cases with tuberculum sellae meningioma . Neurosurg Rev . 2016 ;39 (4 ):691 697 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 55

    Kassam AB , Prevedello DM , Carrau RL , et al. Endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery: analysis of complications in the authors’ initial 800 patients . J Neurosurg . 2011 ;114 (6 ):1544 1568 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 56

    Cohen S , Jones SH , Dhandapani S , et al. Lumbar drains decrease the risk of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak following endonasal endoscopic surgery for suprasellar meningiomas in patients with high body mass index . Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown). 2018 ;14 (1 ):66 71 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 57

    Zwagerman NT , Wang EW , Shin SS , et al. Does lumbar drainage reduce postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery? A prospective, randomized controlled trial . J Neurosurg . 2019 ;131 (4 ):1172 1178 .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 112 112 82
Full Text Views 159 159 135
PDF Downloads 209 209 166
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0