Hemopatch® as a primary dural sealant in cranial neurosurgery: Technical note and a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of Hemopatch® as a primary dural sealant in preventing CSF leakage following cranial surgery. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks occur in cranial operations and are associated with significant patient burden and expense. The use of Hemopatch® as a dural sealant in cranial neurosurgical procedures is described and analyzed in this study. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from all patients who underwent a craniotomy for various neurosurgical indications where Hemopatch® was used as the primary dural sealant between June 2017 and June 2022. Infection and CSF leak were the main indicators evaluated after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 119 consecutive patients met our inclusion criteria. The median was age 41.5 years, and 52.5% were female. The mean follow-up period was 2.3 years (7 months to 6 years). There were 110 (92.44%) supratentorial and 9 (7.56%) infratentorial craniotomies. Postoperative CSF leak was reported in 2 patients (1.68%), one in each cohort. Postoperative infection occurred in one patient (0.84%). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that using Hemopatch® as a dural sealant in cranial surgery is effective and safe. After supra-/infratentorial craniotomies, the rate of postoperative adverse events in our sample was within the range of known surgical revision rates. Future randomized clinical studies are required to confirm our encouraging findings.

Anatomical Step-by-Step Dissection of Midline Suboccipital Approaches to the Fourth Ventricle for Trainees: Surgical Anatomy of the Telovelar, Transvermian, and Superior Transvelar Routes, Surgical Principles, and Illustrative Cases.

Introduction Safe, effective access to the fourth ventricle for oncologic resection remains challenging given the depth of location, restricted posterior fossa boundaries, and surrounding eloquent neuroanatomy. Despite description in the literature, a practical step-by step dissection guide of the suboccipital approaches to the fourth ventricle targeted to all training levels is lacking. Methods Two formalin-fixed, latex-injected specimens were dissected under microscopic magnification and endoscopic visualization. Dissections of the telovelar, transvermian, and supracerebellar infratentorial-superior transvelar approaches were performed by one neurosurgery resident (D.D.D.), under guidance of senior authors. The dissections were supplemented with representative clinical cases to highlight pertinent surgical principles. Results The telovelar and transvermian corridors afford excellent access to the caudal two-thirds of the fourth ventricle with the former approach offering expanded access to the lateral recess, foramen of Luschka, adjacent skull base, and cerebellopontine angle. The supracerebellar infratentorial-superior transvelar approach reaches the rostral third of the fourth ventricle, the cerebral aqueduct, and dorsal mesencephalon. Key steps described include positioning and skin incision, myofascial dissection, burr hole and craniotomy, durotomy, the aforementioned transventricular routes, and identification of relevant skull base landmarks. Conclusion The midline suboccipital craniotomy represents a foundational cranial approach, particularly for lesions involving the fourth ventricle. Operatively oriented resources that combine stepwise neuroanatomic dissections with representative cases provide a crucial foundation for neurosurgical training. We present a comprehensive guide for trainees in the surgical anatomy laboratory to optimize familiarity with fourth ventricle approaches, mastery of relevant microsurgical anatomy, and simultaneous preparation for learning in the operating room.

Trigeminal neuralgia pain outcomes following microsurgical resection versus stereotactic radiosurgery for petroclival meningiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Petroclival meningiomas (PCMs) are challenging lesions to treat because of their deep location and proximity to critical neurovascular structures. Patients with these lesions commonly present because of local mass effect. A symptom that proves challenging to definitively manage is trigeminal neuralgia (TN), which occurs in approximately 5% of PCM cases. To date, there is no consensus on whether microsurgical resection or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) leads to better outcomes in the treatment of TN secondary to PCM. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors aimed to evaluate the available literature on the efficacy of microsurgical resection versus SRS for controlling TN secondary to PCM. METHODS: The Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were queried from database inception to May 17, 2022, using the search terms "(petroclival AND meningioma) AND (trigeminal AND neuralgia)." Study inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) reports on patients aged ≥ 18 years and diagnosed with TN secondary to PCM, 2) cases treated with microsurgical resection or SRS, 3) cases with at least one posttreatment follow-up report of TN pain, 4) cases with at least one outcome of tumor control, and 5) publications describing randomized controlled trials, comparative or single-arm observational studies, case reports, or case series. Exclusion criteria were 1) literature reviews, technical notes, conference abstracts, or autopsy reports; 2) publications that did not clearly differentiate data on patients with PCMs from data on patients with different tumors or with meningiomas in different locations (other intracranial or spinal meningiomas); 3) publications that contained insufficient data on treatments and outcomes; and 4) publications not written in the English language. References of eligible studies were screened to retrieve additional relevant studies. Data on pain and tumor outcomes were compared between the microsurgical resection and SRS treatment groups. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman variance correction was used to pool estimates from the included studies. RESULTS: Two comparative observational studies and 6 single-arm observational studies describing outcomes after primary intervention were included in the analyses (138 patients). Fifty-seven patients underwent microsurgical resection and 81 underwent SRS for the management of TN secondary to PCM. By the last follow-up (mean 71 months, range 24-149 months), the resection group had significantly higher rates of pain resolution than the SRS group (82%, 95% CI 50%-100% vs 31%, 95% CI 18%-45%, respectively; p = 0.004). There was also a significantly longer median time to tumor recurrence following resection (43.75 vs 16.7 months, p < 0.01). The resection group showed lower rates of pain persistence (0%, 95% CI 0%-6% vs 25%, 95% CI 13%-39%, p = 0.001) and pain exacerbation (0% vs 12%, 95% CI 3%-23%, p = 0.001). The most common postintervention Barrow Neurological Institute pain score in the surgical group was I (66.7%) compared with III (27.2%) in the SRS group. Surgical reintervention was less frequently required following primary resection (1.8%, 95% CI 0%-37% vs 19%, 95% CI 1%-48%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Microsurgical resection is associated with higher rates of TN pain resolution and lower rates of pain persistence and exacerbation than SRS in the treatment of PCM. SRS with further TN management is a viable alternative in patients who are not good candidates for microsurgical resection.

Current Role of Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Craniopharyngiomas: A 10-Year Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparison with the Open Transcranial Approach.

In recent years, the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for craniopharyngiomas has proven to be a safe option for extensive tumor resection, with minimal or no manipulation of the optic nerves and excellent visualization of the superior hypophyseal branches when compared to the Transcranial Approach (TCA). However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the criteria for selecting different approaches. To explore the current results of EEA and discuss its role in the management of craniopharyngiomas, we performed MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS searches from 2012 to 2022. Baseline characteristics, the extent of resection, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed through an X2 and Fisher exact test, and a comparison between quantitative variables through a Kruskal-Wallis and verified with post hoc Bonferroni. The tumor volume was similar in both groups (EEA 11.92 cm3, -TCA 13.23 cm3). The mean follow-up in months was 39.9 for EEA and 43.94 for TCA, p = 0.76). The EEA group presented a higher visual improvement rate (41.96% vs. 25% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 7.7). Permanent DI was less frequent with EEA (29.20% vs. 67.40% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 0.2). CSF Leaks occurred more frequently with EEA (9.94% vs. 0.70% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 15.8). Recurrence rates were lower in the EEA group (EEA 15.50% vs. for TCA 21.20%, p = 0.04, OR 0.7). Our results demonstrate that, in selected cases, EEA for resection of craniopharyngiomas is associated with better results regarding visual preservation and extent of tumor resection. Postoperative CSF leak rates associated with EEA have improved compared to the historical series. The decision-making process should consider each person's characteristics; however, it is noticeable that recent data regarding EEA justify its widespread application as a first-line approach in centers of excellence for skull base surgery.

Editorial: A Tribute to Mediterranean Pioneers in Facial Plastic and Craniomaxillofacial Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Physicians from the Mediterranean civilization were profoundly instrumental in the early development and contemporary advancement of the craniomaxillofacial field. These feats are scarcely studied or acclaimed. In this editorial, the authors explore the contributions of these major Mediterranean pioneers. METHODS: A literature review on the subject was performed using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Mayo Clinic Libraries. RESULTS: Mediterranean medicine has recognized and managed craniomaxillofacial pathologies from as early as the 10th century. The first inscriptions were authored by Abu Alkasem al-Zahrawi and Serefeddin Sabuncuoglu. Starting in the 15th century, Leonardo da Vinci shed light on anatomy and esthetics at a time where Gasparo Tagliacozzi spearheaded maxillofacial techniques. The field during the Renaissance was dominated by Hippocrates Asclepiades. Varaztad Kazanjian revolutionized the armamentarium necessitated by mass emergencies during the World War. In the 20th century, Paul Tessier redefined the limits of craniomaxillofacial treatment by using facial osteotomies and developing refined surgical instruments. Modern day Sam Hamra, Enrico Robotti, and Daniel Labbé continue to lead educational and innovative fronts of the field. CONCLUSIONS: This essay highlights some important historical contributions to the fields of craniomaxillofacial and facial plastic surgery by pioneer surgeons from around the Mediterranean.

Foundations and guidelines for high-quality three-dimensional models using photogrammetry: A technical note on the future of neuroanatomy education.

Hands-on dissections using cadaveric tissues for neuroanatomical education are not easily available in many educational institutions due to financial, safety, and ethical factors. Supplementary pedagogical tools, for instance, 3D models of anatomical specimens acquired with photogrammetry are an efficient alternative to democratize the 3D anatomical data. The aim of this study was to describe a technical guideline for acquiring realistic 3D anatomic models with photogrammetry and to improve the teaching and learning process in neuroanatomy. Seven specimens with different sizes, cadaveric tissues, and textures were used to demonstrate the step-by-step instructions for specimen preparation, photogrammetry setup, post-processing, and display of the 3D model. The photogrammetry scanning consists of three cameras arranged vertically facing the specimen to be scanned. In order to optimize the scanning process and the acquisition of optimal images, high-quality 3D models require complex and challenging adjustments in the positioning of the specimens within the scanner, as well as adjustments of the turntable, custom specimen holders, cameras, lighting, computer hardware, and its software. MeshLab® software was used for editing the 3D model before exporting it to MedReality® (Thyng, Chicago, IL) and SketchFab® (Epic, Cary, NC) platforms. Both allow manipulation of the models using various angles and magnifications and are easily accessed using mobile, immersive, and personal computer devices free of charge for viewers. Photogrammetry scans offer a 360° view of the 3D models ubiquitously accessible on any device independent of operating system and should be considered as a tool to optimize and democratize the teaching of neuroanatomy.

Single session versus multisession stereotactic radiosurgery for the management of intracranial meningiomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, outcomes, and complications of single session (SS-SRS) and multisession (MS-SRS) stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of intracranial meningiomas. METHODS: Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment protocols and outcomes were conducted. After the selection process, 20 articles describing 1483 cases were included. RESULTS: A total of 1303 patients who underwent SS-SRS and 180 patients who underwent MS-SRS for the management of their intracranial meningioma were reported in the included studies. SS-SRS and MS-SRS had comparable one-year (SS-SRS: 98% vs. MS-SRS: 100%, p > 0.99) and five-year (SS-SRS: 94% vs. MS-SRS: 93%, p = 0.71) tumor control rates. The groups also had comparable tumor volume reduction/tumor regression rates (SS-SRS: 44% vs. MS-SRS: 25%, p = 0.25), tumor volume stability rates (SS-SRS: 51% vs. MS-SRS: 75%, p = 0.12), and tumor progression rates (SS-SRS: 4% vs. MS-SRS: 4%, p = 0.89). SS-SRS and MS-SRS yielded similar complication rates (10.4% vs. 11.4%, p = 0.68) and comparable functional improvement rates (MS-SRS: 44% vs. SS-SRS: 36%, p = 0.57). However, MS-SRS was used for significantly larger tumor volumes (MS-SRS: 23.8 cm3 vs. SS-SRS: 6.1 cm3, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: SS-SRS and MS-SRS resulted in comparable tumor control, tumor volumetric change, and functional outcomes despite significant biases in selecting patients for SS- or MS-SRS.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Lumbar Fusion Procedures: 2000-2019.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar fusions are commonly performed spinal procedures. Despite this, publicly available lumbar fusion procedural and monetary data are sparse. This study aimed to evaluate trends in utilization and reimbursement for Medicare patients from 2000-2019. METHODS: Medicare National Summary Data Files were used. Data were collected for true physician reimbursements and procedural rates for posterolateral fusion, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from 2000-2019. Reimbursement was adjusted to inflation utilizing the 2019 Consumer Price Index. RESULTS: From 2000-2019, 1,266,942 lumbar fusion procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. Annual number of lumbar interbody fusion procedures increased by 57,740 procedures (+95%) from 61,017 in 2000 to 118,757 in 2019. This change in annual volume varied by procedure type, with posterolateral fusion increasing from 24,873 procedures in 2000 to 45,665 procedures in 2019 (+20,792, +83.59%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion increasing from 4227 in 2000 to 29,285 procedures in 2019 (+25,058, 592.81%), PLIF increasing from 5579 procedures in 2000 to 5628 procedures in 2019 (+49, +0.88%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion increasing from 26,338 procedures in 2012 to 38,179 procedures in 2019 (+11,841, +44.96%). The mean inflation-adjusted reimbursement decreased for posterolateral fusion from $1662.96 to $1245.85 (-$417.11, -25.08%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion from $1159.45 to $750.33 (-$409.12, -35.29%), PLIF from $1225.02 to $1223.72 (-$1.3, -0.11%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from $1541.59 per procedure in 2012 to $1467.08 per procedure in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar fusions have increased in the last 2 decades, although reimbursement for all procedures has decreased. Knowledge of these trends is important to ensure adequate resource allocation to surgeons as treating lumbar pathologies becomes more common among the aging Medicare population.

The Eyebrow Approach for the Management of Pediatric Frontal Epidural Abscesses Secondary to Diffuse Sinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approaches to the anterior cranial fossa have evolved over the past few decades. The management of frontal epidural abscesses (EDAs) secondary to diffuse sinusitis in the pediatric population using minimally invasive techniques is scarcely reported in the literature. Herein, we report the utilization of a minimally invasive eyebrow approach for multidisciplinary concurrent evacuation of frontal EDA secondary to diffuse sinusitis and trephination of the frontal sinus in three pediatric patients. CASE REPORTS: Three pediatric patients presented to the emergency room with severe headaches, visual changes, somnolence, and significant facial and periorbital swelling. Imaging revealed diffuse sinusitis with focal frontal epidural extension. In all cases, progressive clinical deterioration along with the radiographic findings mandated urgent surgical intervention. The eyebrow approach allowed for concomitant evacuation of the frontal EDA and trephination of the frontal sinus followed by functional endoscopic sinus surgery in the same setting. All patients tolerated the procedure well with complete resolution of their symptoms at the completion of antibiotic therapy and complete resolution of the EDA. CONCLUSION: The eyebrow approach is a minimally invasive technique that should be considered as part of the armamentarium in the management of select EDA in the pediatric population. It allows for multidisciplinary collaboration between neurosurgeons and otolaryngologists for concomitant evacuation of the EDA and trephination of the frontal sinus. This approach is a feasible, safe, and effective minimally invasive technique that can be employed for the management of EDA secondary to diffuse sinusitis in the pediatric population.