Graves, Jeffrey P.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic transnasal surgery offers a minimally invasive alternative to transcranial approaches for accessing midline skull base lesions involving the petrous apex and petroclival region. However, lateral access, particularly behind the petrous internal carotid artery (ICA), remains limited. The contralateral transmaxillary (CTM) approach provides a more direct surgical trajectory, more parallel to the petrous ICA. Yet, lateral access through this approach can be restricted by anatomic barriers, including the pterygoid process and lateral buttress of the maxillary sinus. We aimed to evaluate the contralateral transmaxillary-transpterygoid (CTMP) approach, with and without the lateral buttress removal (CTMP-LBR), to determine whether these modifications could enhance surgical access to the petroclival region. METHODS: Ten sides from 5 formalin-fixed, latex-injected cadaveric specimens were dissected to compare CTM, CTMP, and CTMP-LBR approaches. Petrous bone drilling was directed posterolaterally behind the petrous ICA toward the region medial to the cochlea. In addition, 30 sides from computed tomography angiography scans were analyzed to obtain radiographic measurements for each approach. RESULTS: Compared with CTM, both CTMP and CTMP-LBR significantly increased access for retrocarotid petrous bone drilling ( P < .001) and yielded a wider surgical angle relative to midline ( P < .001), in both cadaveric and radiographic analyses. In dissections, 20% of sides required CTM only, 50% benefited from CTMP, and 30% required CTMP-LBR to achieve adequate lateral access. Radiographic analysis revealed that CTMP required a median of 4 mm of pterygoid drilling, whereas CTMP-LBR required 9 mm and enabled a trajectory parallel to the petrous ICA with only 11 mm of soft tissue displacement. Patients with smaller angles between the petrous ICA and the horizontal plane were significantly more likely to benefit from CTMP over CTM ( P = .005). CONCLUSION: Modification of the CTM approach with pterygoid drilling and optional LBR improves retrocarotid access. Preoperative evaluation of the petrous ICA angle may help optimize patient-specific planning in endoscopic petroclival surgery.

Background Sinonasal pathology, such as chronic inflammatory disease or neoplasm, can cause secondary nasolacrimal duct obstruction (sNLDO). There is a paucity of data on dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) techniques and outcomes for NLDO secondary to known sinonasal pathologies. Objective To describe case characteristics, management, and surgical outcomes of sNLDO at a tertiary academic center. Methods Charts of DCR cases with at least 3 months follow-up done at a single institution over a 5-year period (2018-2022) were reviewed. Patient and surgical characteristics were recorded and compared between secondary and primary NLDO groups. The primary outcome was early functional success of DCR, assessed by improvement or resolution of epiphora at 3 months. Results A total of 236 cases were included. Of those, 79 (33.5%) were classified as secondary NLDO associated with sinonasal pathology. Reasons for sNLDO were sinonasal cancer (46.8%), chronic inflammatory disease (24.1%), trauma (16.5%), or prior head and neck radiation (31.6%). When comparing primary acquired NLDO to sNLDO cases, DCR for sNLDO was more likely to be performed endoscopically (68.4% vs 31.8%, P < .01), by a multidisciplinary team of rhinologist and oculoplastic surgeon (70.9% vs 8.3%, P < .01), and required bilateral surgery (36.7% vs 5.7%, P < .01). The overall functional success rate was 79.7% for sNLDO compared to 87.9% for primary acquired NLDO ( P < .01). Revision surgery for sNLDO, history of sinonasal malignancy, and radiation were associated with lower functional success rates (66.7%, 70.3%, and 68.0%, respectively). Canalicular pathology was more common in sNLDO cases (29.0% vs 8.3%, P < .01). Conclusions Secondary NLDO was more commonly managed with an endoscopic approach by a multidisciplinary team. Revisions for sNLDO, as well as cases with a history of sinonasal malignancy and radiation, had a markedly lower success rate, and sNLDO was frequently associated with canalicular obstruction. These findings may facilitate surgical planning and patient counseling.

OBJECTIVE Olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB) is a rare, malignant tumor of the sinonasal tract that arises from olfactory epithelium. Although surgery is the preferred first-line treatment, tumor involvement of adjacent structures may preclude the ability to achieve negative margins during initial resection. Herein, the authors examine the oncological outcomes of patients with positive margins after primary resection of ONB, with the aim of determining predictors of disease progression and patterns of recurrence. METHODS The authors performed an institutional review of 25 patients with positive-margin ONB after resection. Cox survival analyses were used to determine any statistically significant predictors of worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS A total of 93 patients who were diagnosed with ONB were identified, of whom 25 patients had positive margins following their primary resection. Eleven (44%) had a delayed finding of positive margins that were initially negative in the operating room but returned as positive on final pathology. Four patients had subtotal resection (STR), whereas the remaining patients underwent gross-total resection. Twenty-four patients received adjuvant radiotherapy (96%), and 15 additionally received adjuvant chemotherapy (60%). Fourteen patients (56%) experienced recurrence/progression at a median time of 35 months following resection (IQR 19–70 months). Local recurrence occurred in 10 patients (40%), regional in 9 (36%), and distant metastasis in 2 (8%). In Cox survival analyses, the 5-year PFS and OS were 55.1% and 79.2%, respectively. Kadish stage D was predictive of worse PFS in univariate (hazard ratio [HR] 15.67, 95% CI 3.38–72.61, p < 0.001) and multivariate (HR 15.46, 95% CI 1.45–164.91, p = 0.023) analyses. Hyams grade, adjuvant chemotherapy, and primary radiotherapy were not associated with PFS. Furthermore, Kadish stage D and STR were predictive of worse OS in univariate analysis (HR 12.64, 95% CI 2.03–78.86, p = 0.007; HR 7.31, 95% CI 1.45–36.84, p = 0.016; respectively). However, local and regional recurrence was not associated with worse OS. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of patients with positive-margin ONB may experience disease recurrence. Patients with an advanced disease stage (Kadish D) may have a higher likelihood of developing recurrence/progression. Furthermore, patients with tumor burden following resection (STR and Kadish D) may have worse OS. However, in positive-margin ONB with no gross disease following initial resection, the presence of disease recurrence does not significantly alter survival when receiving salvage therapy.