Microneurosurgery for pituitary adenoma by supraorbital keyhole or endonasal transsphenoidal approaches

Xue-yuan LI,Xin-gang LI,Xue-guang ZHANG,Lian-qun ZHANG,Xiang-yu MA,Peng ZHAO
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-8925.2009.12.017
2009-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical effects of microneurosurgery by supraorbital key-hole or endonasal transsphenoidal approaches in the treatment of pituitary adenoma and investigate their complications. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the data of 87 patients with pituitary adenoma of which the anteroposterior diameter was less than 3 cm. These patients, admitted to our hospital from May, 2006 to June, 2008, were operated in an endoscope-assisted microsurgical manner via a supraorbital key-hole approach (n=42) or an endonasal transsphenoidal approach (n=45). The efficacy of these two approaches was compared and their complications were observed. Results The excision rate of the pituitary adenoma developing on or around the sella turcica operated through the supraorbital key-hole approach was significantly higher than that through the endonasal transsphenoidal approach(P< 0.05); while that of microadenoma or adenoma developing towards the sphenoid sinus operated through the supraorbital keyhole approach was statistically lower than that through the endonasal transsphenoidal approach (P<0.05). No obvious differences on the improvement of endocrine secretion, visual acuity and field was noted in these two approaches (P>0.05). The incidence rate of epistaxis and unilateral dysosphresia in the supraorbital key-hole approach was significantly lower as compared with that in the endonasal transsphenoidal approach (P<0.05). Conclusion Rarely having such complications as dysosphresia, epistaxis and sphenoiditis, neuroendoscopic surgery through supraorbital key-hole approach is the best way of treating the pituitary adenoma developing on or around the sella turcica and worth to promote in clinic.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?