Predictors of the Spontaneous Resolution of Central Diabetes Insipidus Following Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery for Craniopharyngioma

Chengbing Pan,Jialong Qi,Jie Wu,Bowen Wu,Shenhao Xie,Xiao Wu,Bin Tang,Tao Hong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.01.118
IF: 2.21
2023-01-01
World Neurosurgery
Abstract:OBJECTIVE:Central diabetes insipidus (CDI) is the most common complication of endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) for craniopharyngioma. However, some cases of CDI could spontaneously resolve during the follow-up period. Hence, this study aimed to determine the predictive factors for the spontaneous resolution of CDI. METHODS:Data of patients with CDI who underwent EES for craniopharyngioma between February 2009 and June 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were divided into 2 groups based on the resolution of CDI during follow-up: the recovery and no recovery groups. The baseline characteristic, surgical, and follow-up results of patients were compared. RESULTS:We identified 84 patients with CDI (35 in the recovery group and 49 in the no recovery group). A direct comparison showed that retaining the pituitary stalk (57.1% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.000) and no-hypothalamic injury (HI) (68.6% vs. 20.4%, P = 0.000) were more common in the recovery group, whereas hydrocephalus at diagnosis (8.6% vs. 46.9%, P = 0.000) was significantly more common in the no recovery group. Subsequently, we found through univariate and multivariate analysis that the spontaneous resolution of CDI was associated with hydrocephalus at diagnosis (yes vs. no: odds ratio [OR], 0.198; P = 0.045), pituitary stalk injury (retaining vs. sectioning: OR, 7.055; P = 0.004), and the Hong et al HI pattern (mild-HI vs. no-HI: OR, 0.183; P = 0.038; unilateral-HI vs. no-HI: OR, 0.147; P = 0.017; bilateral-HI vs. no-HI: OR, 0.154; P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS:Hydrocephalus at diagnosis, pituitary stalk injury, and the Hong et al HI pattern might be predictors of the spontaneous resolution of CDI following EES for craniopharyngioma.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?