Browse

You are looking at 1 - 5 of 5 items for

  • Refine by Access: all x
  • By Author: Schwartz, Theodore H. x
  • By Author: Bander, Evan D. x
Clear All
Full access

Harminder Singh, Sarang Rote, Ajit Jada, Evan D. Bander, Gustavo J. Almodovar-Mercado, Walid I. Essayed, Roger Härtl, Vijay K. Anand, Theodore H. Schwartz, and Jeffrey P. Greenfield

The authors present 4 cases in which they used intraoperative CT (iCT) scanning to provide real-time image guidance during endonasal odontoid resection. While intraoperative CT has previously been used as a confirmatory test after resection, to the authors’ knowledge this is the first time it has been used to provide real-time image guidance during endonasal odontoid resection. The operating room setup, as well as the advantages and pitfalls of this approach, are discussed. A mobile intraoperative CT scanner was used in conjunction with real-time craniospinal neuronavigation in 4 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal odontoidectomy for basilar invagination. All patients underwent a successful decompression. In 3 of the 4 patients, real-time intraoperative CT image guidance was instrumental in achieving a comprehensive decompression. In 3 (75%) cases in which the right nostril was the predominant working channel, there was a tendency for asymmetrical decompression toward the right side, meaning that residual bone was seen on the left, which was subsequently removed prior to completion of the surgery.

Endoscopic endonasal odontoid resection with real-time intraoperative image-guided CT scanning is feasible and provides accurate intraoperative localization of pathology, thereby increasing the chance of a complete odontoidectomy. For right-handed surgeons operating predominantly through the right nostril, special attention should be paid to the contralateral side of the resection, where there is often a tendency for residual pathology.

Full access

Aikaterini Patrona, Kunal S. Patel, Evan D. Bander, Alpesh Mehta, Apostolos John Tsiouris, Vijay K. Anand, and Theodore H. Schwartz

OBJECTIVE

Surgery within the cavernous sinus (CS) remains a controversial topic because of the delicate and complex anatomy. The risk also varies with tumor consistency. Softer tumors such as pituitary adenomas are more likely to be surgically treated, while firm tumors such as meningiomas are often treated with radiosurgery. However, a wide range of pathologies that can involve the CS are amenable to surgery. The authors describe and analyze their results using endonasal endoscopic “medial-to-lateral” approaches for nonadenomatous, nonmeningeal tumors, in relation to the degree of invasion within the CS.

METHODS

A prospectively acquired database of consecutive endoscopic approaches for tumors with verified intraoperative CS invasion was reviewed. Pituitary adenomas and meningiomas were excluded. Degree of invasion of the CS was classified using the Knosp-Steiner (KS) grading system as well as the percentage of cavernous carotid artery (CCA) encasement. Extent of resection of the entire tumor and of the CS component was assessed by independent neuroradiologists using volumetric measurements of the pre- and postoperative MRI studies. Demographic data and complications were noted.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (mean age 51.1 years who received endoscopic surgery between 2007 and 2013 met the selection criteria. There were 11 malignant tumors, including chordoma, chondrosarcoma, hemangiopericytoma, lymphoma, and metastatic cancer, and 4 benign tumors, including 3 cavernous hemangiomas and 1 dermoid. All cases were discussed before treatment in a tumor board. Adjuvant treatment options included chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The mean pre- and postoperative tumor volumes were 12.74 ml and 3.86 ml. Gross-total resection (GTR; ie, resection greater than 95%) was the goal in 13 cases and was achieved in 6 patients (46%) while in addition 5 patients had a greater than 80% resection. Gross-total resection in the CS was accomplished in 55% of the tumors with KS Grades 1–2 and in 16.6% of the tumors with KS grades 3–4, respectively. Likewise, GTR was accomplished in 55% of the tumors with CCA encasement under 75% and in 14.3% of the lesions with CCA encasement over 75%, irrespective of tumor volume and underlying pathology. There were 18 preexisting cranial neuropathies involving cranial nerves III–VI, of which 9 fully resolved, 4 improved, and 3 remained unchanged; 2 of these worsened with tumor recurrence. Surgical complications included 1 transient new cranial nerve VI palsy associated with Horner's syndrome and 1 case of panhypopituitarism. There were no postoperative CSF leaks and no infections. The mean extended follow-up was 34.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Endonasal endoscopic approaches can play a role in the management of nonmeningeal, nonadenomatous tumors invading the CS, either through biopsy, debulking, or GTR. An advantage of this method is the relief of preexisting cranial neuropathies with low risk for new neurological deficit. Extent of resection within the CS varies with KS grade and degree of carotid encasement irrespective of the underlying pathology. The goals of surgery should be clearly established preoperatively in consultation with radiation and medical oncologists.

Full access

Evan D. Bander, Harminder Singh, Colin B. Ogilvie, Ryan C. Cusic, David J. Pisapia, Apostolos John Tsiouris, Vijay K. Anand, and Theodore H. Schwartz

OBJECTIVE

Planum sphenoidale (PS) and tuberculum sellae (TS) meningiomas cause visual symptoms due to compression of the optic chiasm. The treatment of choice is surgical removal with the goal of improving vision and achieving complete tumor removal. Two options exist to remove these tumors: the transcranial approach (TCA) and the endonasal endoscopic approach (EEA). Significant controversy exists regarding which approach provides the best results and whether there is a subset of patients for whom an EEA may be more suitable. Comparisons using a similar cohort of patients, namely, those suitable for gross-total resection with EEA, are lacking from the literature.

METHODS

The authors reviewed all cases of PS and TS meningiomas that were surgically removed at Weill Cornell Medical College between 2000 and 2015 (TCA) and 2008 and 2015 (EEA). All cases were shown to a panel of 3 neurosurgeons to find only those tumors that could be removed equally well either through an EEA or TCA to standardize both groups. Volumetric measurements of preoperative and postoperative tumor size, FLAIR images, and apparent diffusion coefficient maps were assessed by 2 independent reviewers and compared to assess extent of resection and trauma to the surrounding brain. Visual outcome and complications were also compared.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were identified who underwent either EEA (n = 17) or TCA (n = 15). The preoperative tumor size was comparable (mean 5.58 ± 3.42 vs 5.04 ± 3.38 cm3 [± SD], p = 0.661). The average extent of resection achieved was not significantly different between the 2 groups (98.80% ± 3.32% vs 95.13% ± 11.69%, p = 0.206). Postoperatively, the TCA group demonstrated a significant increase in the FLAIR/edema signal compared with EEA patients (4.15 ± 7.10 vs −0.69 ± 2.73 cm3, p = 0.014). In addition, the postoperative diffusion-weighted imaging signal of cytotoxic ischemic damage was significantly higher in the TCA group than in the EEA group (1.88 ± 1.96 vs 0.40 ± 0.55 cm3, p =0.008). Overall, significantly more EEA patients experienced improved or stable visual outcomes compared with TCA patients (93% vs 56%, p = 0.049). Visual deterioration was greater after TCA than EEA (44% vs 0%, p = 0.012). While more patients experienced postoperative seizures after TCA than after EEA (27% vs 0%, p = 0.038), there was a trend toward more CSF leakage and anosmia after EEA than after TCA (11.8% vs 0%, p = 0.486 and 11.8% vs 0%, p = 0.118, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this small single-institution study of similarly sized and located PS and TS meningiomas, EEA provided equivalent rates of resection with better visual results, less trauma to the brain, and fewer seizures. These preliminary results merit further investigation in a larger multiinstitutional study and may support EEA resection by experienced surgeons in a subset of carefully selected PS and TS meningiomas.

Free access

Nelson Moussazadeh, Vishaal Prabhu, Evan D. Bander, Ryan C. Cusic, Apostolos John Tsiouris, Vijay K. Anand, and Theodore H. Schwartz

OBJECTIVE

The authors compared clinical and radiological outcomes after resection of midline craniopharyngiomas via an endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) versus an open transcranial approach (TCA) at a single institution in a series in which the tumors were selected to be equally amenable to gross-total resection (GTR) with either approach.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review of previously untreated adult midline craniopharyngiomas was performed. Lesions were evaluated by 4 neurosurgeons blinded to the actual approach used to identify cases that were equally amenable to GTR using either an EEA or TCA. Radiological and clinical outcome data were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six cases amenable to either approach were identified, 21 EEA and 5 TCA. Cases involving tumors that were resected via a TCA had a trend toward larger diameter (p = 0.10) but were otherwise equivalent in preoperative clinical and radiological characteristics. GTR was achieved in a greater proportion of cases removed with an EEA than a TCA (90% vs 40%, respectively; p = 0.009). Endoscopic resection was associated with superior visual restoration (63% vs 0%; p < 0.05), a decreased incidence of recurrence (p < 0.001), lower increase in FLAIR signal postoperatively (−0.16 ± 4.6 cm3 vs 14.4 ± 14.0 cm3; p < 0.001), and fewer complications (20% vs 80% of patients; p < 0.001). Significantly more TCA patients suffered postoperative cognitive loss (80% vs 0; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

An EEA is a safe and effective approach to suprasellar craniopharyngiomas amenable to GTR. For this select group of cases, the EEA may provide higher rates of GTR and visual improvement with fewer complications compared with a TCA.

Full access

Evan D. Bander, Samuel H. Jones, Ilhami Kovanlikaya, and Theodore H. Schwartz

OBJECT

Brain retraction systems are frequently required to achieve surgical exposure of deep-seated brain lesions. Spatula-based systems can be associated with injury to the cortex and deep white matter, particularly adjacent to the sharp edges, which can result in uneven pressure on the parenchyma over the course of a long operation. The use of tubular retractor systems has been proposed as a method to overcome these limitations. There have been no studies assessing the degree of brain injury associated with the use of tubular retractors.

METHODS

Twenty patients were retrospectively identified at Weill Cornell Medical College who underwent resection of deep-seated brain lesions between 2005 and 2014 with the aid of a METRx tubular retractor system. Using the Brainlab software, pre- and postoperative images were analyzed to assess volume, depth, extent of resection, and change in postoperative MR FLAIR hyperintensity and restricted diffusion on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).

RESULTS

The mean preoperative tumor volume was 16.25 ± 17.6 cm3. Gross-total resection was achieved in 75%, near-total resection in 10%, and subtotal resection in 15% of patients. There was a small but not statistically significant increase in average FLAIR hyperintensity volume by 3.25 ± 10.51 cm3 (p = 0.16). The average postoperative volume of DWI high signal area with restricted diffusion on apparent diffusion coefficient maps was 8.35 ± 3.05 cm3. Assuming that the volume of restricted diffusion on DWI around tumor was 0 preoperatively, this represented a statistically significant increase on DWI (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although tubular retractors do not appear to significantly increase FLAIR signal in the brain, DWI intensity around the retractors can be identified. These data indicate that although tubular retractors may minimize damage to surrounding tissues, they still cause cytotoxic edema and cellular damage. Objective comparison against other retraction methods, as compared by 3D volumetric analysis or similar methods, will be important in determining the true advantage of tubular retractor systems.