Snyderman, Carl H

OBJECTIVE Suprasellar meningioma resection via either the transcranial approach (TCA) or the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) is an area of controversy and active evaluation. Skull base surgeons increasingly consider patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when choosing an approach. No PRO measure currently exists to assess quality of life for suprasellar meningiomas. METHODS Adult patients undergoing suprasellar meningioma resection between 2013 and 2019 via EEA (n = 14) or TCA (n = 14) underwent semistructured interviews. Transcripts were coded using a grounded theory approach to identify themes as the basis for a PRO measure that includes all uniquely reported symptoms. To assess content validity, 32 patients and 15 surgeons used a Likert scale to rate the relevance of items on the resulting questionnaire and the general Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System–29 (PROMIS29). The mean scores were calculated for all items and compared for TCA versus EEA patient cohorts by using unpaired t-tests. Items on either questionnaire with mean scores ≥ 2.0 from patients were considered meaningful and were aggregated to form the novel Suprasellar Meningioma Patient-Reported Outcome Survey (SMPRO) instrument. RESULTS Qualitative analyses resulted in 55 candidate items. Relative to patients who underwent the EEA, those who underwent the TCA reported significantly worse future outlook before surgery (p = 0.01), tiredness from medications 2 weeks after surgery (p = 0.001), and word-finding and memory difficulties 3 months after surgery (p = 0.05 and < 0.001, respectively). The items that patients who received a TCA were most concerned about included medication-induced lethargy after surgery (2.9 ± 1.3), blurry vision before surgery (2.7 ± 1.5), and difficulty reading due to blurry vision before surgery (2.7 ± 2.7). Items that patients who received an EEA were most concerned about included blurry vision before surgery (3.5 ± 1.3), difficulty reading due to blurry vision before surgery (2.4 ± 1.3), and problems with smell postsurgery (2.9 ± 1.3). Although surgeons overall overestimated how concerned patients were about questionnaire items (p < 0.0005), the greatest discrepancies between patient and surgeon relevance scores were for blurry vision pre- and postoperatively (p < 0.001 and < 0.001, respectively) and problems with taste postoperatively (p < 0.001). Seventeen meningioma-specific items were considered meaningful, supplementing 8 significant PROMIS29 items to create the novel 25-item SMPRO. CONCLUSIONS The authors developed a disease- and approach-specific measure for suprasellar meningiomas to compare quality of life by operative approach. If demonstrated to be reliable and valid in future studies, this instrument may assist patients and providers in choosing a personalized surgical approach.

Background Endoscopic skull‐base surgery (ESBS) is employed in the management of diverse skull‐base pathologies. Paralleling the increased utilization of ESBS, the literature in this field has expanded rapidly. However, the rarity of these diseases, the inherent challenges of surgical studies, and the continued learning curve in ESBS have resulted in significant variability in the quality of the literature. To consolidate and critically appraise the available literature, experts in skull‐base surgery have produced the International Consensus Statement on Endoscopic Skull‐Base Surgery (ICAR:ESBS). Methods Using previously described methodology, topics spanning the breadth of ESBS were identified and assigned a literature review, evidence‐based review or evidence‐based review with recommendations format. Subsequently, each topic was written and then reviewed by skull‐base surgeons in both neurosurgery and otolaryngology. Following this iterative review process, the ICAR:ESBS document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results The ICAR:ESBS document addresses the role of ESBS in primary cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea, intradural tumors, benign skull‐base and orbital pathology, sinonasal malignancies, and clival lesions. Additionally, specific challenges in ESBS including endoscopic reconstruction and complication management were evaluated. Conclusion A critical review of the literature in ESBS demonstrates at least the equivalency of ESBS with alternative approaches in pathologies such as CSF rhinorrhea and pituitary adenoma as well as improved reconstructive techniques in reducing CSF leaks. Evidence‐based recommendations are limited in other pathologies and these significant knowledge gaps call upon the skull‐base community to embrace these opportunities and collaboratively address these shortcomings.