Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

A study on sublabial transsphenoidal treatment of pituitary tumor under microscope with aid of endoscope

  • 1Email author,
  • 2,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Chinese Neurosurgical Journal20184:22

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-018-0130-y

  • Received: 9 April 2018
  • Accepted: 5 July 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

A pituitary tumor is a tumor with a high incidence among brain tumors. Microscopic traditional STT approach with aid of endoscope has a high therapeutic effect and few complications.

Methods

The authors reviewed 146 patients who underwent STT resection of sellar masses between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013. From this group, 40 patients who underwent microscopic STT surgery with aid of endoscope were included in the study. In this series, there were many nonfunctional and Growth Hormone(GH) secreting adenoma. In the study group, tumor size ranged from 60 to 79 mm in 3 cases. Pathophysiological studies, tumor sizes, clinical outcomes, extent of resection, visual function and complication were estimated.

Results

In our study, gross-total resection(GTR) was achieved in 33 patients (82.5%), subtotal in 3 (7.5%), and partial in 4 (10%). Visual acuity were improved in 82.1%, while 17.9% were unchanged. Visual fields were improved in 81.2%. No deaths occurred in this cohort of patients.

Conclusions

Pituitary adenoma surgery under microscope with aid of endoscope is an effective treatment method, which results in high (> 90%) rates of resection. It is not associated with high rates of major complications and is safe when performed by experienced surgeons.

Keywords

  • STT approach
  • Endoscopic
  • Sellar
  • Pituitary surgery
  • Complication

Background

Pituitary adenomas comprise about 10–12% of all intracranial tumors [1]. The microscopic STT approach has been recognized as a less-invasive surgery for pituitary tumors [2, 3]. Endoscopic endonasal pituitary tumor surgery provides a more clear and panoramic view and made it possible to distinguish the boundary between the tumor, the cavernous sinus and the arachnoid membrane [410]. However, postoperative CSF leak and some infectious complications has not disappeared and has become a frequent complication [1117]. Nasal septum bone flap is reported to very effective for restoration of dural defect in sellar area after tumor removal [1822]. We describe a method of obtaining a bone flap necessary for the sellar floor repairment using the traditional STT approach, and exploring and remove a residual tumor with a endoscope, which simply not visible with microscope [23].

Method

Patient materials

This study was approved by the Neurosurgery Clinic of Pyongyang medical school hospital of the Kim Il Sung General University in DPRK. One hundred forty-five consecutive patients of pituitary adenomas treated between January 2006 and December 2013 with or/not endoscopic removal were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were treated by the same neurosurgeons. The patients, whose follow-up period was over one year, were 65 men and 81 women, with ages ranging from 20 to 65 years old (mean 46.6). Among the 116 pituitary adenomas, 39 were growth hormone-secreting, 10 were prolactin-secreting, 3 were adrenocorticotropic hormone-secreting and 61 were nonfunctioning adenomas (Table 1). All 52 functioning adenomas were microadenomas and the others were macroadenomas (Table 1, Fig. 1). Eight patients had undergone previous surgeries, including transsphenoidal surgery in five patients, craniotomy in two patients, and both in one patient.
Table 1

Pathology

Group

Non-functioning

GH

Prolactin

ACTH

Mixed

Etc

Control (n = 105)

45 (42.9)

25 (23.8)

5 (4.8)

2 (1.9)

3 (2.8)

25 (23.8)

Study (n = 40)

16 (40.0)

14 (35.0)

5 (12.5)

1 (2.5)

 

4 (10.0)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Coronal and sagittal MRI images of a patient who underwent a STT approach a. MRI image before surgery, showing a large pituitary adenoma extending suprasellar area and compressing the optic chiasm upward, b. MRI image 6 month later STT surgery showing fat grafts in the sella turcica and sphenoid sinus. The diaphragm sellae has descended into the sellar cavity and revealed complete disappearance of the tumor in the sellar and suprasellar region

Data collected included observation of intraoperative CSF fistula, and postoperative complications including CSF fistula, meningitis and septal perforation.

Surgical technique

The patient is placed in supine position and have been administered general anesthesia. The surgeon stands on the right side of the patient and elevates the head of the operating table by 15 degrees and tilts the face about 30 degrees to the left. The gingivobuccal sulcus, septum and face skin around the mouth was sterile and draped. Then,the gingivobuccal sulcus and nasal septum were infiltrated with lidocaine hydrochloride(HCl) and 1/200000 adrenaline. A horizontal sublabial incision was made to the depth of the periosteum of the maxilla, which was elevated superiorly to the pyriform aperture, the anterior nasal spine and the anterior angle of the nasal septum.

The anterior edge of the cartilaginous nasal septum was incised by a blade, and the mucous membrane was peeled from the cartilaginous and the osseous nasal septum by using a peeler so that it opened the mucosa sideways. The cartilaginous nasal septum was peeled to the right for repairment later. The Hardy speculum was inserted and the nasal mucosa of the deep part was separated from the deep osseous nasal septum. Bone nasal septum flap were reserved for restoration of sellar floor after the main procedure. Make sure that both blade of the Hardy speculum are placed symmetrically in the midline (Fig. 2a). Next, using the surgical microscope found the natural ostium of the sphenoidal sinus, and removed the sphenoidal bones with a punch(Fig. 2b). If there was an interstitial wall within the sphenoidal sinus, it will also be removed to reach the sellar floor using rongeur and a fine chisel (Fig. 2c). The dura was revealed (Fig. 2d). The test puncturing is performed with an injector of long needle to check whether or not there is a cyst or an aneurysm, and the sellar dura was dissected (Fig. 2e). The tumor was removed using suction and various types of ring curette (Fig. 2f).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Removal of the tumor and pathological studies. a: Insertion of Hardy speculum to the sphenoidal bone. b: Confirm of ostium of sphenoidal sinus and removal of sphenoidal bone. c: Confirm of sellar floor. d: Removal of sphenoidal floor and exposure of sellar dura. e: The sellar dura was opened with a cruciate incision. f: Image after tumor removal. g, h: Pathological studies: multifunctional adenoma;PRL(+), GH(+), TSH(++)(g: hematoxylin and eosin staining, original magnification, *200. h: hematoxylin and eosin staining, original magnification, *400)

Although the tumor is small, the lesion was re-examined and the residual tumor was removed under the endoscopic view. If the tumor is large and cannot be found under the microscope, using an 30 ° and 75 °endoscope searched and removed the residual tumor. The fascia that was harvested from the lateral femur was filled in the sellar space and restored to the bony nasal septum which was remained for the repairment of sellar defect [24]. The cartilaginous nasal septum was restored to the midline and the nasal mucosa was returned to its original position. Nasal cavity was filled with gauze of ointment to fix the nasal mucosa and inserted the air tube to allowed to nasal breathing. Finally, sutured gingivobuccal mucosa. The filling material was removed 3 days after surgery.

Evaluation method

Pathology

In this series, pituitary adenomas were classified according to immunohistochemical staining patterns [25]. In the study group, the number of nonfunctioning(40.0%) and GH adenoma(35.0%) was large and the number of nonfunctioning adenoma(42.9%) was large in the control group (Fig. 2g, h, Table 1).

Size of tumor

All patients underwent contrast - enhanced computed tomography(CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging(MRI) before surgery. The tumor size was defined as the greatest diameter of lesion on MRI. In the study group, the number of 30 to 39 mm size(42.5%) was large and the number of 20 to 29 mm(50.9%) was large in the control group (Fig. 1a, Table 2).
Table 2

Size of tumor

Group

~ 9

10~ 19

20~ 29

30~ 39

40~ 49

50~ 59

60~ 69

70~ 79

Control (n = 106)

8(7.5)

12(11.3)

54(50.9)

26(24.5)

4(3.8)

2(1.9)

  

Study (n = 40)

1(2.5)

5(12.5)

8(20.0)

17(42.5)

5(12.5)

1(2.5)

1(2.5)

2(5.0)

Tumor removal

Two surgical technique, including the traditional microscopic STT approach(72.6%) and microscopic STT approach with aid of endoscope(27.4%) were utilized to remove the sellar tumors.

The extent of tumor removal was assessed by MRI after 6 months to confirm the survival of the tumor (Fig. 1b, Table 3).
Table 3

Tumor removal grade

Group

Total removal

Subtotal removal

Partial removal

Control(n = 106)

75(70.8)

16(15.1)

15(14.1)

Study(=40)

33(82.5)**

3(7.5)

4(10.0)

**(p < 0.01)

Change of visual function

We compared the preoperative and postoperative 7th day’s visual acuity and visual field tests to determine the treatment effect (Tables 4 and 5).
Table 4

Change of visual acuity

Group

The number of defected eye Before surgery

The number of improved eye After surgery

Control(n = 212)

138(100.0)

112(81.1)

Study (n = 80)

56(100.0)

46(82.1)

n: The number of eye

Table 5

Change of visual field

Group

The number of defected eye Before surgery

The number of improved eye After surgery

Control(n = 212)

144(100.0)

116(80.5)

Study (n = 80)

64(100.0)

52(81.2)

n:The numberof eye

Statistical method

Chi Square Test and Fisher’s Exact Test was used. A p value< 0.05 was considered significant difference.

Result

As shown in Table 3, in the study group, GTR was archived in 33 patients(82.5%) and in the control group was 75 patients(70.8%). There was no significant difference in visual function improvement between the two groups (Tables 4 and 5).

Surgical outcomes

Treatment efficacy was significantly higher in the study group(97.5%) than in the control group(92.5%)(Table 6).
Table 6

Therapy efficiency

Group

Cure

Good

No change

Worse

Death

Efficacy (%)

Control (n = 106)

78(73.6)

20(18.9)

5(4.7)

1(0.9)

2(1.9)

92.5

Study (n = 40)

35(87.5)

4(10.0)

1(2.5)

  

97.5*

*(p < 0.05)

Postoperative complication

As shown in Table 7, postoperative complication was recognized in the control group and there were no complications in the study group. The patients with postoperative complications in the control group were reoperation patients.
Table 7

Postoperative complication

Group

Rhinorrhea

Meningitis

Septal perforation

Control(n = 106)

1(0.94)

1(0.94)

1(0.94)

Study(=40)

0(0.0)

0(0.0)

0(0.0)

Discussion

Since the end of the 2000s, we have begun surgery on pituitary tumors by combination of endoscopes with traditional STT approach. With aid of overseas Korean, we achieved the part of rigid endoscope, light source and air drill. Based on this, using the 0 °, 30 ° and 75° endoscope we have decided to remove residual tumor which couldnot be removed with traditional STT approach and adopted it into practice [26].

As a result of applying this method to surgery, the treatment was more effective. Although fully endoscopic endonasal surgery regards to minimally invasive method to the patients and has a higher treatment efficacy, there are still some issues to be solved in many aspects such as postoperative CSF rhinorrhea and infection. In addition, dural substitute and fibrin glue etc. used in endoscopic surgery were all imported, so it did not fit our situation [27].

Therefore, we tried to improve the tumor removal efficiency by combining endoscopes of various angles with traditional STT approach. As shown in the results of the study, the operative efficiency was high and the postoperative complications such as CSF leakage and meningitis were still few [14, 15, 2830].

Conclusion

STT surgery to the pituitary tumor combined with endoscope is still a significant surgical procedure. Especially postoperative complications are extremely low. It is a very economical surgical approach that allows you to achieve great success with a little cost. It is also helpful to extract a tumor that can not be seen under a microscope.

Abbreviations

ACTH: 

Adrenocorticotrophic hormone

CSF: 

Cerebrospinal fluid

CT: 

Computed tomography

DPRK: 

Democratic people’s republic of korea

GH: 

Growth hormone

GTR: 

Gross total resection

HCl: 

Hydrochloride

MRI: 

Magnetic resonance imaging

PA: 

Pituitary adenoma

STT: 

Sublabial transseptal transsphenoidal

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Jianhua Xiong Department of Neurosurgery, General Hospital, Tianjin Medical University,Tianjin,China, for his suggestion in preparing this article.

Funding

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Author’s contributions

YP, XY and Yongdok Kim reviewed the patient records from hospital, participated in drafted the manuscript. HK participated in the design of the study. NL and SK conceived of the study, and participated in its design and coordination and CJ and Yongchol Kim helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Neurosurgery, Pyongyang Medical School Hospital, Kim Il Sung General University, Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
(2)
Department of Neurosurgery, General Hospital, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China

References

  1. Oruckaptan HH, Senmevsim O, Ozcan OE, et al. Pituitary adenomas: results of 684 surgically treated patients and review of the literature. Surg Neurol. 2000;53:211–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Dallapiazza R, Bond AE, Grober Y, Louis RG, Payne SC, Oldfield EH, Jane JA Jr. Retrospective analysis of a concurrent series of microscopic versus endoscopic transsphenoidal surgeries for Knosp grades 0–2 nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas at a single institution. J Neurosurg. 2014;121:511–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Gao Y, Zhong C, Wang Y, Xu S, Guo Y, Dai C, Zheng Y, Wang Y, Luo Q, Jiang J. Endoscopic versus microscopic transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma surgery: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;12:94.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Dhandapani S, Singh H, Negm HM, Cohen S, Anand VK, Schwartz TH. Cavernous sinus invasion in pituitary adenomas: systematic review and pooled data meta-analysis of radiologic criteria and comparison of endoscopic and microscopic surgery. World Neurosurg. 2016;96:36–46.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Elhadi AM, Hardesty DA, Zaidi HA, Kalani MY, Nakaji P, White WL, Preul MC, Little AS. Evaluation of surgical freedom for microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal approaches to the Sella. Neurosurgery. 2015;11(Suppl 2):69–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Jane JA Jr, Dumont AS, Sheehan JP, Laws ER Jr. Inactive Adenomas. In: Tonn J-C, Westphal M, Rutka JT, Grossman SA, editors. Neuro-oncology of CNS tumors. United States of America: Springer; 2006. p. 184.Google Scholar
  7. Juraschka K, Khan OH, Godoy BL, Monsalves E, Kilian A, Krischek B, Ghare A, Vescan A, Gentili F, Zadeh G. Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach to large and giant pituitary adenomas: institutional experience and predictors of extent of resection. J Neurosurg. 2014;121:75–83.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Singh H, Essayed WI, Cohen-Gadol A, Zada G, Schwartz TH. Resection of pituitary tumors: endoscopic versus microscopic. J Neuro-Oncol. 2016;130:309–17.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Wagenmakers MA, Boogaarts HD, Roerink SH, Timmers HJ, Stikkelbroeck NM, Smit JW, van Lindert EJ, Netea-Maier RT, Grotenhuis JA, Hermus AR. Endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery: a good and safe primary treatment option for Cushing’s disease, even in case of macroadenomas or invasive adenomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2013;169:329–37.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Zoli M, Milanese L, Bonfatti R, Sturiale C, Pasquini E, Frank G, Mazzatenta D. Cavernous sinus invasion by pituitary adenomas: role of endoscopic endonasal surgery. J Neurosurg Sci. 2016;60:485–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ammirati M, Wei L, Ciric I. Short-term outcome of endoscopic versus microscopic pituitary adenoma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013;84:843–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. de Divitiis E, Laws ER, Giani U, Iuliano SL, de Divitiis O, Apuzzo ML. The current status of endos-copy in transsphenoidal surgery: an international survey. World Neurosurg. 2015;83:447–54.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goudakos JK, Markou KD, Georgalas C. Endoscopic versus microscopic trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol. 2011;36:212–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Halvorsen H, Ramm-Pettersen J, Josefsen R, Rønning P, Reinlie S, Meling T, Berg-Johnsen J, Bollerslev J, Helseth E. Surgical complications after transsphenoidal microscopic and endoscopic surgery for pituitary adenoma: a consecutive series of 506 procedures. Acta Neurochir. 2014;156:441–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Magro E, Graillon T, Lassave J, Castinetti F, Boisson-neau S, Tabouret E, Fuentes S, Velly L, Gras R, Dufour H. Complications related to the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach for nonfunc-tioning pituitary macroadenomas in 300 consecutive patients. World Neurosurg. 2016;89:442–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Mortini P. Cons: endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery is not superior to microscopic transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas. Endocrine. 2014;47:415–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Tabaee A, Anand VK, Brown SM, Lin JW, Schwartz TH. Algorithm for reconstruction after endoscopic pituitary and skull base surgery. Laryngoscope Database. 2007; https://doi.org/10.1097/MLG.0b013e31805c08c5
  18. Cappabianca P, Cavallo LM, Esposito F, Valente V, Divitiis E. Sellar repair in endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery: results of 170 cases. Neurosurgery Database. 2002; https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000309112.17087.28
  19. Esposito F, Dusick JR, Fatemi N, Kelly DF. Graded repair of cranial base defects and cerebrospinal fluid leaks in transsphenoidal surgery. Operative Neurosurgery Database. 2007; https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000255354.64077.66
  20. Romero AC, Nora JE, Topczewski TE, Aguiar PH, Alobid I, Rodriguéz EF. Cerebrospinal fluid fistula after endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery: experience in a spanish center. SciELO Database. 2010; https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-282X2010000300017
  21. Sciarretta V, Mazzatenta D, Ciarpaglini R, Pasquini E, Farneti G, Frank G. Surgical repair of persisting CSF leaks following standard or extended endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary tumor. Thieme Database. 2010; https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1246161
  22. Zanation AM, Carrau RL, Snyderman CH, Germanwala AV, Gardner PA, Prevedello DM, et al. Nasoseptal flap reconstruction of high flow intraoperative cerebral spinal fluid leaks during endoscopic skull base surgery. Ingenta Database. 2009; https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2009.23.3378
  23. Jho HD, Carrau RL. Endoscopy assisted transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma. Technical note. Acta Neurochirurgica. 1996;138(12):1416–25.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Uygur ER, et al. Sublabial Transseptal Approach to Pituitary Adenomas with Special Emphasis on Rhinological Complications. Turkish Neurosurgery. 2008;18(4):425–30.Google Scholar
  25. McCutcheon IE. Pituitary tumors in oncology. In: DeMonte F, Gilbert MR, Mahajan A, McCutcheon IE, editors. Tumors of the brain and spine. United States of America: Springer; 2007. p. 193–4.Google Scholar
  26. Kerr PB, Oldfield EH. Sublabial-endonasal approach to the Sella turcica. J Neurosurg. 2008;109(1):153–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Levi V, et al. Microscopic versus endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma: analysis of surgical safety in 221 consecutive patients. John Wiley & Sons Ltd _ Clinical Otolaryngology. 2016;42:439–94.Google Scholar
  28. Spencer WR, Levine JM, Couldwell WT, et al. Approaches to the sellar and parasellar region: a retrospective comparison of the endonasal-transsphenoidal and sublabial-transsphenoidal approaches. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;122(3):367–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Urquhart AC, Bersalona FB, Ejercito VS, et al. Nasal septum after sublabial transseptal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;115(1):64–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Zaidi HA, Awad AW, Bohl MA, Chapple K, Knecht L, Jahnke H, White WL, Little AS. Comparison of outcomes between a less experienced surgeon using a fully endoscopic technique and a very experienced surgeon using a microscopic transsphenoidal technique for pituitary adenoma. J Neurosurg. 2016;124:596–604.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2018

Advertisement