Recinos, Pablo F

Abstract Introduction Cushing's disease (CD) is associated with hypercoagulability which is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) perioperatively. This risk persists even after successful transsphenoidal surgery (TSS). However, there are no current guidelines for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. Objective Characterize existing thromboprophylaxis management practices in patients undergoing TSS for CD. Methods An anonymous RedCap survey comprised of questions about perioperative thromboprophylaxis in CD patients was distributed via the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS)/Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) Joint Tumor Section and the North American Skull Base Society (NASBS) email lists. Results The survey was distributed to 554 members of the AANS/CNS Joint Tumor Section and 1,094 members of NASBS asking that members who surgically treat CD respond. Sixty responses (3.0% response rate) were received. Fifty-two (86.7%) respondents are involved in the postoperative management of CD patients. Thirty-six (69.2%) treat all patients with postoperative VTE chemoprophylaxis, 8 (15.4%) treat some patients, while 8 (15.4%) do not use chemoprophylaxis. Preferred chemoprophylaxis varies as 26 (59.1%) administer low molecular weight heparin, 14 (31.8%) give unfractionated heparin, 1 (2.3%) give direct oral anticoagulants, and 3 (6.8%) give aspirin. Most (28, 53.8%) of the respondents perceive the VTE risk in this patient population to be 0 to 5%, 16 (30.8%) perceive the risk to be 6 to 10%, and 8 (15.4%) perceive it to be 11 to 20%. Conclusion There is great variability in VTE detection and postoperative prevention practice patterns in CD patients. This study highlights the need for prospective studies to clarify optimal pharmacologic chemoprophylaxis strategies and duration in this patient population.

Background Historically, lumbar drains (LD) have played a prominent role in endonasal skull base surgery. Over the past few decades, advancements in techniques have augmented our ability to successfully reconstruct complex skull base defects and often obviates the need for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion. Clarity on the appropriate use of LDs is needed. Objective To examine the literature for the need for LDs in contemporary skull base reconstruction after resection of skull base tumors. Methods A systematic literature review of English language articles by using PubMed and Ovid. Search terms included “lumbar drain,” “CSF leak,” and “endoscopic endonasal reconstruction.” Articles were included when they pertained to adults, used current methods for reconstruction (i.e., multilayered repair or vascularized tissue), and addressed CSF leak rates secondary to endoscopic resection of skull base masses. All the studies discussed CSF leaks that resulted from traumatic-, idiopathic-, or sinus surgery-related iatrogenic causes were excluded. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Results A total of five articles met inclusion criteria. These comprised 376 endoscopic skull base tumor resection and reconstruction cases; 5.59% developed postoperative CSF leaks. A meta-analysis was conducted by incorporating three studies that met criteria based on testing for heterogeneity. The average odds ratio for postoperative CSF leak for patients who did not have an LD relative to patients who had an LD was 0.590 (95% confidence interval, 0.214–1.630). Given a p value of 0.30, the results demonstrated a lack of statistically significant improvement between patients who had an LD and patients who did not have an LD. Various details, such as the defect size and type of CSF leak, were not consistently reported among studies. Conclusions Available evidence for the use of LDs in skull base surgery is of poor quality. Analysis of the literature revealed heterogenous and varied reporting in the primary literature. Further studies that include randomized controlled trials are needed.

BackgroundThe impact of failed cerebrospinal fluid leak (CSF) leak repair in endoscopic skull base surgery has not been adequately studied.MethodsIn this investigation we reviewed patients who had undergone endoscopic skull base surgery between 2002 and 2014 at 7 international centers. Demographic variables, comorbidities, tumor characteristics, and repair techniques were evaluated to determine association with successful repair of CSF leak. Postoperative complications and length of stay were compared among groups.ResultsData were collected on 2097 patients who were divided into 3 groups: (1) those with no intraoperative leak (n = 1533); (2) those with successful repair of their intraoperative leak (n = 452); and (3) those with failed repair (n = 112). Compared with successful repair, failed repair was associated with an increased risk of intracranial infection (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3‐13.15), pneumocephalus (OR, 16; 95% CI, 5.8‐44.4), 30‐day readmission (OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 5.3‐13.5), reoperation (OR, 115.4; 95% CI, 56.3‐236.8), and prolonged hospital stay (14.9 vs 7.0 days, p < 0.01). Outcomes in patients who had successful repairs of intraoperative leaks were similar to those who never had leakage. Intraoperative use of pedicled nasoseptal flaps was associated with successful repair (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.34‐0.92).ConclusionIntraoperative CSF leaks are a frequent and expected occurrence during endoscopic skull base surgery. Failed CSF leak repair has a significant impact on patient outcomes, with increased rates of postoperative pneumocephalus, intracranial infections, reoperation, deep vein thrombosis, readmission, and prolonged hospital stay. Recognition and repair of intraoperative CSF leaks reduces postoperative complications. Use of pedicled nasoseptal flaps improves outcomes in reconstructing defects at higher risk for postoperative leak.

BackgroundIn patients undergoing transnasal endoscopic sellar surgery, an analysis of risk factors and predictors of intraoperative and postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (CSF) would provide important prognostic information.MethodsA retrospective review of patients undergoing endoscopic sellar surgery for pituitary adenomas or craniopharyngiomas between 2002 and 2014 at 7 international centers was performed. Demographic, comorbidity, and tumor characteristics were evaluated to determine the associations between intraoperative and postoperative CSF leaks. Correlations between reconstructive and CSF diversion techniques were associated with postoperative CSF leak rates. Odds ratios (OR) were identified using a multivariate logistic regression model.ResultsData were collected on 1108 pituitary adenomas and 53 craniopharyngiomas. Overall, 30.1% of patients had an intraoperative leak and 5.9% had a postoperative leak. Preoperative factors associated with increased intraoperative leaks were mild liver disease, craniopharyngioma, and extension into the anterior cranial fossa. In patients with intraoperative CSF leaks, postoperative leaks occurred in 10.3%, with a higher postoperative leak rate in craniopharyngiomas (20.8% vs 5.1% in pituitary adenomas). Once an intraoperative leak occurred, craniopharyngioma (OR = 4.255, p = 0.010) and higher body mass index (BMI) predicted postoperative leak (OR = 1.055, p = 0.010). In patients with an intraoperative leak, the use of septal flaps reduced the occurrence of postoperative leak (OR = 0.431, p = 0.027). Rigid reconstruction and CSF diversion techniques did not impact postoperative leak rates.ConclusionIntraoperative CSF leaks can occur during endoscopic sellar surgery, especially in larger tumors or craniopharyngiomas. Once an intraoperative leak occurs, risk factors for postoperative leaks include craniopharyngiomas and higher BMI. Use of septal flaps decreases this risk.

Background Giant frontal mucoceles, characterized by significant intracranial and/or intraorbital extension, can present with significant neurologic symptoms. Although typical mucoceles are managed endoscopically, giant mucoceles are often treated with an open or combined approach due to various concerns, including frontal lobe displacement, size, and rapid decompression of the intracranial component. The impact of significant intracranial extension on outcomes is not well described. Objective This review studied key neurologic considerations in the management of giant frontal sinus mucoceles and analyzed outcomes of different management strategies. Methods Systematic literature review by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Results Thirty-two articles, which represented 85 cases, met inclusion criteria. Neurologic symptoms on presentation ranged from headache (24.7%) and vision loss (12.9%) to extremity weakness (1.2%), frontal lobe syndrome (2.4%), and seizures (4.7%). Twenty-eight patients were treated endoscopically (34.1%), and 54 (65.9%) were treated with an external approach. Twenty-five of the open procedures included a craniotomy. Indications for the open approach included subdural empyema, enucleation, or large anterior table defects. Perioperative antibiotics were not consistently used. No perioperative seizures were reported with any approach. There were six cerebrospinal fluid leaks, all in the patients who underwent open procedures. The overall recurrence rate was 3.5%, with no recurrences reported in patients treated with an open approach. Follow-up ranged from 1 week to 8 years. Conclusions Giant frontal mucoceles often present with various neurologic symptoms. Both open and endoscopic techniques offer excellent results. Endoscopic management is effective and preferred, except in special circumstances. An interdisciplinary team approach should be used to optimize surgical planning.