A Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched Assessment of Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Approaches in the Management of Pituitary Adenomas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is considerable controversy as to which of the 2 operating modalities (microsurgical or endoscopic transnasal surgery) currently used to resect pituitary adenomas (PAs) is the safest and most effective intervention. We compared rates of clinical outcomes of patients with PAs who underwent resection by either microsurgical or endoscopic transnasal surgery. METHODS: To independently assess the outcomes of each modality type, we sought to isolate endoscopic and microscopic PA surgeries with a 1:1 tight-caliper (0.01) propensity score-matched analysis using a multicenter, neurosurgery-specific database. Surgeries were performed between 2017 and 2020, with data collected retrospectively from 12 international institutions on 4 continents. Matching was based on age, previous neurological deficit, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, tumor functionality, tumor size, and Knosp score. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among a pool of 2826 patients, propensity score matching resulted in 600 patients from 9 surgery centers being analyzed. Multivariate analysis showed that microscopic surgery had a 1.91 odds ratio (OR) ( P = .03) of gross total resection (GTR) and shorter operative duration ( P < .01). However, microscopic surgery also had a 7.82 OR ( P < .01) for intensive care unit stay, 2.08 OR ( P < .01) for intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, 2.47 OR ( P = .02) for postoperative syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH), and was an independent predictor for longer postoperative stay (ß = 2.01, P < .01). Overall, no differences in postoperative complications or 3- to 6-month outcomes were seen by surgical approach. CONCLUSION: Our international, multicenter matched analysis suggests microscopic approaches for pituitary tumor resection may offer better GTR rates, albeit with increased intensive care unit stay, CSF leak, SIADH, and hospital utilization. Better prospective studies can further validate these findings as matching patients for outcome analysis remains challenging. These results may provide insight into surgical benchmarks at different centers, offer room for further registry studies, and identify best practices.

Pituitary society expert Delphi consensus: operative workflow in endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection.

PURPOSE: Surgical workflow analysis seeks to systematically break down operations into hierarchal components. It facilitates education, training, and understanding of surgical variations. There are known educational demands and variations in surgical practice in endoscopic transsphenoidal approaches to pituitary adenomas. Through an iterative consensus process, we generated a surgical workflow reflective of contemporary surgical practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods consensus process composed of a literature review and iterative Delphi surveys was carried out within the Pituitary Society. Each round of the survey was repeated until data saturation and > 90% consensus was reached. RESULTS: There was a 100% response rate and no attrition across both Delphi rounds. Eighteen international expert panel members participated. An extensive workflow of 4 phases (nasal, sphenoid, sellar and closure) and 40 steps, with associated technical errors and adverse events, were agreed upon by 100% of panel members across rounds. Both core and case-specific or surgeon-specific variations in operative steps were captured. CONCLUSIONS: Through an international expert panel consensus, a workflow for the performance of endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection has been generated. This workflow captures a wide range of contemporary operative practice. The agreed "core" steps will serve as a foundation for education, training, assessment and technological development (e.g. models and simulators). The "optional" steps highlight areas of heterogeneity of practice that will benefit from further research (e.g. methods of skull base repair). Further adjustments could be made to increase applicability around the world.

COVID-19 rehabilitation units are twice as expensive as regular rehabilitation units.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant motor, cognitive, psychological, neurological and cardiological disabilities in many infected patients. Functional rehabilitation of infectious COVID-19 patients has been implemented in the acute care wards and in appropriate, ad hoc, multidisciplinary COVID-19 rehabilitation units. However, because COVID-19 rehabilitation units are a clinical novelty, clinical and organizational benchmarks are not yet available. The aim of this study is to describe the organizational needs and operational costs of such a unit, by comparing its activity, organization, and costs with 2 other functional rehabilitation units, in San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. METHODS: The 2-month activity of the COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit at San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy, which was created in response to the emergency need for rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients, was compared with the previous year's activity of the Cardiac Rehabilitation and Motor Rehabilitation Units of the same institute. RESULTS: The COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit had the same number of care beds as the other units, but required twice the amount of staff and instrumental equipment, leading to a deficit in costs. DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit was twice as expensive as the 2 other units studied. World health systems are organizing to respond to the pandemic by expanding capacity in acute intensive care and sub-intensive care units. This study shows that COVID-19 rehabilitation units must be organized and equiped according to the clinical and rehabilitative needs of patients, following specific measures to prevent the spread of infection amongs patients and workers.

Cumulative intracranial tumour volume prognostic assessment: a new predicting score index for patients with brain metastases treated by stereotactic radiosurgery.

Brain metastases (BM) represent the most common intracranial malignancy in adults. Limitations of existing prognostic models reduce their predictivity and clinical applicability. The aim of this study is to validate the cumulative intracranial tumour volume prognostic assessment (CITVPA) as a new prognostic score system for patients with BM treated by Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS). Between January 2001 and December 2015, 1894 patients underwent Gamma Knife SRS treatment. The CITVPA model was implemented and validated as follows: the CITV cut-offs were identified thanks to a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis; the survival predictive factors were selected through a Cox proportional hazard model; its prognostic power was compared to RPA, SIR and GPA through the Harrel concordance index (HCI). According to the ROC curve analysis, the CITV cut-off values were set at 1.5 and 4.0 cc. Based on the multivariate analysis, the CITVPA model included: age (OR 1.010, 95% CI 1.005-1.015, p < 0.001), KPS (OR 0.960, 95% CI 0.956-0.965, p < 0.001), extracranial metastases (OR 1.287, 95% CI 1.154-1.437, p < 0.001), BM number (OR 1.193, 95% CI 1.047-1.360, p = 0.008), and CITV (OR 1.028, 95% CI 1.020-1.036, p < 0.001). A score between 0 and 1 was attributed to each prognosticator; a global CITVPA score ranging from 0 to 5 was assigned with higher results corresponding to worse outcomes. The CITVPA (HCI = 0.64) exhibited a significantly (p < 0.001) higher prognostic power compared to RPA (HCI = 0.55), SIR (HCI = 0.55) and GPA (HCI = 0.61). The CITVPA represents a reliable prognostic system for patients with BM treated by SRS. However, further prospective and multicentric studies are necessary before its applicability in clinical practice.

Operability score: an innovative tool for quantitative assessment of operability in comparative studies on surgical anatomy.

OBJECTIVES: Comparative anatomical studies have proved to be invaluable in the evaluation of advantages and drawbacks of single approaches to access established target areas. Approach-related exposed areas do not necessarily represent useful areas when performing surgical manoeuvres. Accordingly the concept of "operability" has recently been introduced as a qualitative assessment of the ability to execute surgical manoeuvres. The authors propose an innovative model for the quantitative assessment of the operability, defined as "operability score" (OS), which can be effectively and easily applied to comparative studies on surgical anatomy. METHODS: A microanatomical study was conducted on six cadaveric heads. RESULTS: Morphometric measurements were collected and operability scores in selected target points of the surgical field were calculated. As illustrative example, the operability score was applied to the extradural subtemporal transzygomatic approach (ESTZ). CONCLUSION: The operability score is effective in grading system of surgical operability, and instruments manipulation capability. It is a useful tool to evaluate, in a single approach, areas that can be exposed, and to quantify how those areas are suitable for surgical manoeuvres.