Mendoza, Michelle Magana

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Craniopharyngiomas are complex intracranial tumors that pose significant challenges in surgical management. We aimed to develop risk-stratified surgical outcome benchmarks for adult patients undergoing endoscopic craniopharyngioma resection by using the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders database to facilitate comparisons across institutions and guide clinical decision-making. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of adult patients (18 years and older) with craniopharyngioma undergoing a first-time endoscopic transnasal surgery across 14 academic centers in the United States was analyzed using data collected from 2011 to 2024. Patients were stratified into low-risk and high-risk cohorts based on criteria including age, body mass index, selected tumor characteristics (size, infundibular relationship, intraventricular extension), and previous radiation. Surgical outcomes were analyzed, and benchmarking ranges were defined using the established methodology. RESULTS: The overall cohort included 318 patients with a mean age of 50 years. Upon benchmarking analysis (50th-75th percentile performance), low-risk patients (n = 136) had a median length of stay of 4.0 to 6.0 days, 90-day readmission rates of 15.5% to 22.2%, skilled nursing facility discharge rates of <1.0%, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak incidence of <1.0% to 14.3%, gross total resection rates of 50.0% to 60.8%, new postoperative arginine vasopressin deficiency rates of 33.3% to 50.0%, and tumor progression/recurrence rates of <1.0% to 18.3% over a median follow-up period of 27.0 (IQR 10.5-56.5) months. Benchmarking ranges were proposed for each outcome to facilitate cross-institutional comparisons. CONCLUSION: Establishing surgical outcome benchmarks for adult patients undergoing craniopharyngioma resection using data from the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders provides a framework for assessing surgical performance and guiding clinical decision-making. Benchmark ranges can inform institutional quality improvement efforts, perioperative risk stratification, and patient counseling regarding expected postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Perioperative protocols facilitate earlier discharge without compromising safety in nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas, but no large multicenter studies in the United States have investigated protocols regarding Cushing disease (CD). We sought to characterize perioperative protocols and how their implementation influences clinical outcomes in patients with CD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Registry of Adenomas of the Pituitary and Related Disorders consortium comprising 13 US academic pituitary centers. Institutions were surveyed regarding perioperative procedures for patients undergoing transsphenoidal tumor resection for CD. The impacts of institutional procedures and approaches to implementation on length of stay (LOS) and unplanned 90-day readmission were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirteen institutions contributed survey responses and clinical data for a total of 832 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Ten (76.9%) institutions reported having a postoperative protocol, 9 (69.2%) used a formal document to outline their protocol, and 3 (23.1%) had protocols implemented into hospital policy. Mean LOS was significantly reduced in centers with an established protocol (3.14 vs 3.42 days, P = .032), and more so with a formal document (3.10 vs 3.48 days, P = .001) or hospital policy (2.72 vs 3.36 days, P < .001). Patients treated after protocol implementation experienced shorter LOS ( P < .001). Other factors associated with reduced LOS were presence of a separate CD pathway, intraoperative checklist specific to pituitary surgery, non-narcotic pain regimen, Foley removal order, dedicated outpatient advanced practice provider follow-up, and target discharge date ≤2 days. Intraoperative checklist ( P = .045), non-narcotic pain regimen ( P = .048), nasal packing ( P = .005), and 1-day target discharge date ( P = .032) were important factors against readmission. Compared with microscopic surgery, endoscopic surgery was associated with shorter LOS but increased readmission odds. CONCLUSION: This is the first multicenter study to illustrate that implementation of perioperative protocols is associated with a reduction in LOS and readmission risk in patients with CD.

Abstract Purpose: This multicenter, multi-surgeon retrospective study aimed to identify risk factors for postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak following endonasal resection of craniopharyngioma, while evaluating the "perception gap" through a surgeon survey. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 416 patients who underwent endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS) for craniopharyngioma from 20 institutions. Factors were compared between patients with and without postoperative CSF leak, and between Early (2007-2015) and Late (2016-2025) Epochs. Complementing the clinical data, a survey of 19 neurosurgeons captured expert perspectives on risk stratification and management strategies. Results: Overall postoperative CSF leak rate was 13.5% (56/416 patients). Univariate analysis identified predominantly cystic tumors (34% vs. 21%, p = 0.034)and intraoperative lumbar drain (LD) use ( p < 0.028) as associated with postoperative CSF leak. BMI ( p = 0.587), prior surgery ( p = 0.576), and tumor size ( p = 0.363) were not significant. In the multivariable analysis, LD use was associated with a higher postoperative CSF leak rate (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.06–3.46; p = 0.030). Between Epochs, nasoseptal flap (NSF) utilization increased from 70.7% to 87.6% ( p <0.001). NSF was protective (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.07–0.92; p = 0.037) in the Early Epoch; no factors were significant in the Late Epoch. The surgeons’ survey identified prior surgery and intraoperative high flow leaks as primary risks; however, their LD protocols diverged from clinical data. Conclusion: Despite increased use of NSF, CSF leak persists. The study highlights a significant divergence between expert perception and clinical data regarding lumbar drains.