O’Brien, Michael

Abstract Introduction Although endonasal endoscopic approaches (EEA) to the orbit have been previously reported, a didactic resource for educating neurosurgery and otolaryngology trainees regarding the pertinent anatomy, techniques, and decision-making pearls is lacking. Methods Six sides of three formalin-fixed, color latex–injected cadaveric specimens were dissected using 4-mm 0- and 30-degree rigid endoscopes, as well as standard endoscopic equipment, and a high-speed surgical drill. The anatomical dissection was documented in stepwise three-dimensional (3D) endoscopic images. Following dissection, representative case applications were reviewed. Results EEA to the orbit provides excellent access to the medial and inferior orbital regions. Key steps include positioning and preoperative considerations, middle turbinate medialization, uncinate process and ethmoid bulla removal, complete ethmoidectomy, sphenoidotomy, maxillary antrostomy, lamina papyracea resection, orbital apex and optic canal decompression, orbital floor resection, periorbita opening, dissection of the extraconal fat, and final exposure of the orbit contents via the medial-inferior recti corridor. Conclusion EEA to the orbit is challenging, in particular for trainees unfamiliar with nasal and paranasal sinus anatomy. Operatively oriented neuroanatomy dissections are crucial didactic resources in preparation for practical endonasal applications in the operating room (OR). This approach provides optimal exposure to the inferior and medial orbit to treat a wide variety of pathologies. We describe a comprehensive step-by-step curriculum directed to any audience willing to master this endoscopic skull base approach.

Object Considerable biological research has been performed to aid bone healing in conjunction with lumbar fusion surgery. Iliac crest autograft is often considered the gold standard because it has the vital properties of being osteoconductive, osteoinductive, and osteogenic. However, graft site pain has been widely reported as the most common donor site morbidity. Autograft site pain has led many companies to develop an abundance of bone graft extenders, which have limited proof of efficacy. During the surgical consent process, many patients ask surgeons to avoid harvesting autograft because of the reported pain complications. The authors sought to study postoperative graft site pain by simply asking patients whether they knew which iliac crest was grafted when a single skin incision was made for the fusion operation. Methods Twenty-five patients underwent iliac crest autografting with allograft reconstruction during instrumented lumbar fusion surgery. In all patients the autograft was harvested through the same skin incision but with a separate fascial incision. At various points postoperatively, the patients were asked if they could tell which iliac crest had been harvested, and if so, how much pain did it cause (10-point Numeric Rating Scale). Results Most patients (64%) could not correctly determine which iliac crest had been harvested. Of the 9 patients who correctly identified the side of the autograft, 7 were only able to guess. The 2 patients who confidently identified the side of grafting had no pain at rest and mild pain with activity. One patient who incorrectly guessed the side of autografting did have significant sacroiliac joint degenerative pain bilaterally. Conclusions Results of this study indicate the inability of patients to clearly define their graft site after iliac crest autograft harvest with allograft reconstruction of the bony defect unless they have a separate skin incision. This simple, easily reproducible pilot study can be expanded into a larger, multiinstitutional investigation to provide more definitive answers regarding the ideal, safe, and cost-effective bone graft material to be used in spinal fusions.