4.5 Article

Free middle turbinate mucosal graft reconstruction after primary endoscopic endonasal pituitary surgery

期刊

EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY
卷 274, 期 2, 页码 837-844

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-4287-8

关键词

Cerebrospinal fluid; Endoscopic surgical procedures; Free tissue flaps; Pituitary gland; Quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective is to assess whether free middle turbinate (FMT) graft reconstruction, after endoscopic endonasal pituitary surgery, combines an acceptably low post-operative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rate with acceptable rhinological morbidity. This study identified 50 patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal pituitary surgery by the senior author in our teaching hospital between May 2011 and June 2012. FMT graft reconstruction was used in 32 cases. 18 patients were judged pre-operatively as not suitable for FMT reconstruction according to a novel skull base reconstructive algorithm. Outcomes examined were: length of inpatient stay; post-operative CSF leak rate; volume of gross tumour resection; and rhinological morbidity. The rhinological morbidity was measured by the completion of the 22 item sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) questionnaire by all 32 patients at 6 weeks and 6 months post-surgery. 32 patients were included in the study. 9 patients had functioning microadenomas and 23 macroadenomas. The median inpatient stay was 2 days. There were no post-operative CSF leaks. The rate of gross tumour resection, confirmed on post-operative MRI, was 87.5 %. The mean SNOT-22 score was 31.9 at 6 weeks and 23.4 at 6 months post-operation-a statistically significant drop. The use of the FMT graft in the reconstruction of the sella defect after endonasal endoscopic pituitary surgery provides a robust dural repair with an acceptable rhinological morbidity profile. FMT grafting as part of a defined skull base reconstructive algorithm results in a CSF leak rate of zero and allows early patient discharge without the need for nasal packing or lumbar drains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据