Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Daniel M. Prevedello x
  • By Author: Prevedello, Daniel M. x
  • By Author: Oyama, Kenichi x
Clear All Modify Search
Free access

Kenichi Oyama, Ph.D., Daniel M. Prevedello, Leo F. S. Ditzel Filho, Jun Muto, Ph.D., Ramazan Gun, Edward E. Kerr, Bradley A. Otto and Ricardo L. Carrau

Object

The interpeduncular cistern, including the retrochiasmatic area, is one of the most challenging regions to approach surgically. Various conventional approaches to this region have been described; however, only the endoscopic endonasal approach via the dorsum sellae and the transpetrosal approach provide ideal exposure with a caudal-cranial view. The authors compared these 2 approaches to clarify their limitations and intrinsic advantages for access to the interpeduncular cistern

Methods

Four fresh cadaver heads were studied. An endoscopic endonasal approach via the dorsum sellae with pituitary transposition was performed to expose the interpeduncular cistern. A transpetrosal approach was performed bilaterally, combining a retrolabyrinthine presigmoid and a subtemporal transtentorium approach. Water balloons were used to simulate space-occupying lesions. “Water balloon tumors” (WBTs), inflated to 2 different volumes (0.5 and 1.0 ml), were placed in the interpeduncular cistern to compare visualization using the 2 approaches. The distances between cranial nerve (CN) III and the posterior communicating artery (PCoA) and between CN III and the edge of the tentorium were measured through a transpetrosal approach to determine the width of surgical corridors using 0- to 6-ml WBTs in the interpeduncular cistern (n = 8).

Results

Both approaches provided adequate exposure of the interpeduncular cistern. The endoscopic endonasal approach yielded a good visualization of both CN III and the PCoA when a WBT was in the interpeduncular cistern. Visualization of the contralateral anatomical structures was impaired in the transpetrosal approach. The surgical corridor to the interpeduncular cistern via the transpetrosal approach was narrow when the WBT volume was small, but its width increased as the WBT volume increased. There was a statistically significant increase in the maximum distance between CN III and the PCoA (p = 0.047) and between CN III and the tentorium (p = 0.029) when the WBT volume was 6 ml.

Conclusions

Both approaches are valid surgical options for retrochiasmatic lesions such as craniopharyngiomas. The endoscopic endonasal approach via the dorsum sellae provides a direct and wide exposure of the interpeduncular cistern with negligible neurovascular manipulation. The transpetrosal approach also allows direct access to the interpeduncular cistern without pituitary manipulation; however, the surgical corridor is narrow due to the surrounding neurovascular structures and affords poor contralateral visibility. Conversely, in the presence of large or giant tumors in the interpeduncular cistern, which widen the spaces between neurovascular structures, the transpetrosal approach becomes a superior route, whereas the endoscopic endonasal approach may provide limited freedom of movement in the lateral extension.

Restricted access

Jun Muto, Daniel M. Prevedello, Leo F. S. Ditzel Filho, Ing Ping Tang, Kenichi Oyama, Edward E. Kerr, Bradley A. Otto, Takeshi Kawase, Kazunari Yoshida and Ricardo L. Carrau

OBJECTIVE

The endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) offers direct access to midline skull base lesions, and the anterior transpetrosal approach (ATPA) stands out as a method for granting entry into the upper and middle clival areas. This study evaluated the feasibility of performing EEA for tumors located in the petroclival region in comparison with ATPA.

METHODS

On 8 embalmed cadaver heads, EEA to the petroclival region was performed utilizing a 4-mm endoscope with either 0° or 30° lenses, and an ATPA was performed under microscopic visualization. A comparison was executed based on measurements of 5 heads (10 sides). Case illustrations were utilized to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of EEA and ATPA when dealing with petroclival conditions.

RESULTS

Extradurally, EEA allows direct access to the medial petrous apex, which is limited by the petrous and paraclival internal carotid artery (ICA) segments laterally. The ATPA offers direct access to the petrous apex, which is blocked by the petrous ICA and abducens nerve inferiorly. Intradurally, the EEA allows a direct view of the areas medial to the cisternal segment of cranial nerve VI with limited lateral exposure. ATPA offers excellent access to the cistern between cranial nerves III and VIII. The quantitative analysis demonstrated that the EEA corridor could be expanded laterally with an angled drill up to 1.8 times wider than the bone window between both paraclival ICA segments.

CONCLUSIONS

The midline, horizontal line of the petrous ICA segment, paraclival ICA segment, and the abducens nerve are the main landmarks used to decide which approach to the petroclival region to select. The EEA is superior to the ATPA for accessing lesions medial or caudal to the abducens nerve, such as chordomas, chondrosarcomas, and midclival meningiomas. The ATPA is superior to lesions located posterior and/or lateral to the paraclival ICA segment and lesions with extension to the middle fossa and/or infratemporal fossa. The EEA and ATPA are complementary and can be used independently or in combination with each other in order to approach complex petroclival lesions.