Lower airway disease and pituitary surgery: Is there an association with postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak?

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To explore the relationship between lower airway disease and postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea among patients undergoing pituitary surgery STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's 2013 National Inpatient Sample was conducted to characterize the hospital stay and surgical outcomes of patients undergoing pituitary surgery. Patients with lower airway disease (including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma) were compared to a disease-free population identifying demographics and complications over-represented in the lower airway group. RESULTS: The majority of hypophysectomies (92.1%) were performed via a transsphenoidal approach. Among transsphenoidal patients, individuals with asthma (92.8% of the lower airway disease cohort) harbored a greater postoperative CSF leak rate (4.7% vs. 2.7%, P = .022), and were more likely to develop postoperative diabetes insipidus (6.2% vs. 4.1%, P = .024) and neurological complications (13.0% vs. 9.6%, P = .010) when compared to a lower airway disease-free cohort. Patients with CSF rhinorrhea had longer lengths of stay (7.8 days vs. 4.5 days, P < .001) and higher discharge costs ($148,309 vs. $76,246, P < .001). A binary logistic regression model identified having asthma (P = .042), being female (P = .011), and having gastroesophageal reflux disease (P = .006) as independent predictors of postoperative CSF rhinorrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient comorbidities including asthma are associated with a greater risk of postoperative CSF rhinorrhea. Perioperative lower airway assessment and disease control may potentially decrease one's risk of this complication, although further inquiry is urgently needed to identify optimal preventive strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c. Laryngoscope, 127:1543-1550, 2017.

Current trends in surgical approach and outcomes following pituitary tumor resection.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The goals of pituitary tumor resection include normalizing endocrine function, relieving mass effect, and minimizing risk of recurrence. This study investigated current trends in costs and complications for transfrontal and transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of the 2008-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample for patients undergoing pituitary lesion resection. METHODS: Demographics and outcomes were compared between transfrontal and transsphenoidal surgical approaches using χ(2) tests. Multivariate analysis was performed to investigate outcomes while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: There were 8,543 admissions for resection of pituitary lesions that met our inclusion criteria. Most (>90%) were treated transsphenoidally. The transfrontal approach was most frequent in the young (<35 years) and in the South. Rates of mortality and complications were higher in patients undergoing transfrontal surgery. Multivariate analysis found transsphenoidal resection was associated with a reduction in hospital costs and length of stay by over 50%; low-volume hospitals had increased cost and length of stay. There was an increased rate of transfrontal approaches at low-volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors influence outcomes of pituitary tumor resection. Transsphenoidal pituitary surgery is associated with a shorter length of stay, lower cost, and lower complication rates when compared to transfrontal surgery. Case specifics, including tumor location and size, influence approach and lead to a selection bias that cannot be controlled for in the present study. The prevalence of transfrontal resections at low-volume centers may indicate an area of further investigation. Additionally, when controlling for surgical approach, low-volume centers were found to adversely affect economic outcomes and also warrants investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c.

Cost-effectiveness of the endoscopic versus microscopic approach for pituitary adenoma resection.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an endoscopic versus microscopic approach to pituitary adenoma resection. STUDY DESIGN: Markov decision tree economic evaluation. METHODS: An economic evaluation using a Markov decision tree model was performed. The economic perspective was that of the healthcare third-party payer. Effectiveness and probability data were obtained from a single meta-analysis of 38 studies. Costs were obtained from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database and wholesale pharmaceutical pricing. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Comparative treatment groups were: 1) endoscopic approach and 2) microscopic approach to pituitary adenoma resection. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The time horizon was 25 years, and costs were discounted at a rate of 3.5%. RESULTS: The endoscopic approach cost a total of $17,244.63 and produced a total of 24.30 QALYs. The microscopic approach cost a total of $23,756.60 and produced a total of 24.20 QALYs. In the reference case, the endoscopic approach was a dominant intervention (both less costly and more effective); therefore, an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not calculated. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated 79% certainty that the endoscopic approach is the cost-effective decision, at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: This economic evaluation suggests that the endoscopic approach is the more cost-effective intervention compared to the microscopic approach for patients requiring a pituitary adenoma resection.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of two therapeutic methods for prolactinoma].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the therapeutic responses to transsphenoidal surgery and medical therapy in terms of normalization of prolactin (PRL), mortality, morbidity and the cost-effectiveness of PRL normalization in order to establish an individualized therapeutic protocol for the patients with prolactinoma. METHODS: A retrospective study was undertaken of a consecutive series of patients with prolactinoma who were followed for at least 1 year after transsphenoidal surgery or medical treatment. The clinical characteristics and the long-term outcomes (normalization of PRL, morbidity or mortality) were assessed. Utilizing the principle of medical economics and data from the two types of treatment, we worked out a Markov chain and calculated the lowest cost of two kinds of therapeutic protocols. RESULTS: (1) The success rate of normalizing serum PRL through surgical treatment in microadenoma was 85% (22/26), and that of medical treatment was 95% (19/20). There was no statistical difference between the two therapies (P > 0.05). The success rate of normalizing serum PRL through surgical treatment in macroadenoma was 45% (19/42), and that of medical treatment was 5/5. There was a statistical difference between the two therapies (P < 0.05). (2) According to the Markov model, it would cost a microprolactinoma patient 25,129.25 yuan to normalize serum PRL by surgical treatment. This is comparable to the cost of medical treatment which would be 24,943.99 yuan. Whereas for a macroprolactinoma patient surgery would cost 35,208.20 yuan and medical treatment would cost 25,344.38 yuan. CONCLUSIONS: Medical therapy is superior to surgical treatment in regard to complication rate and cost-effectiveness for macro- and extra big prolactinomas. Transsphenoidal surgery remains an option for patients with microadenomas. Markov model is an effective way to predict the treatment cost for patients with hyperprolactinoma at different ages and with different causes.