scholarly journals Comparison of a purely endoscopic three-layer technique versus pericranial flap for reconstruction of anterior skull base defects after sino-nasal tumor resection: assessment of postoperative frontal lobe sagging and frontal lobe falling

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
G. Fiacchini ◽  
S. De Santi ◽  
D. Trico ◽  
C. Cambi ◽  
V. Seccia ◽  
...  
2002 ◽  
Vol 127 (6) ◽  
pp. 494-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Noone ◽  
J. David Osguthorpe ◽  
Sunil Patel

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the position of a pericranial flap reconstruction of anterior skull base defects with respect to the original floor of the anterior cranial fossa. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart and radiology review of 17 patients (1993–2001) with pericranial flap reconstruction for anterior skull base defects and 17 controls was performed. RESULTS: At 6 or more months after surgery, the new positions of the pericranial flaps ranged from 5 mm above to 11.3 mm below the positions of the original cribriform plates. There were no complications related to the pericranial flaps such as hemorrhage, flap loss, or brain herniation except for 2 (11.8%) cerebrospinal fluid leaks, 1 of which required operative correction. CONCLUSION: Pericranial flap reconstruction is a reliable method with low morbidity for closure of the most common skull base defect from the craniofacial resection that entails removal—unilateral or bilateral—of the fovea ethmoidalis, cribriform plate, and/or superior septum. This flap creates a watertight seal between the extradural space and the nasal cavity, prevents clinically significant brain herniation, and is associated with a low rate of cerebrospinal fluid leakage even without postoperative lumbar subarachnoid drainage of the cerebrospinal fluid.


Skull Base ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lana Christiano ◽  
Dare Ajibade ◽  
Jean Eloy ◽  
James Liu

1988 ◽  
Vol 98 (11) ◽  
pp. 1159???1164 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Price ◽  
Mark Loury ◽  
Benjamin Carson ◽  
Michael E. Johns

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Anderson Eloy ◽  
Osamah J. Choudhry ◽  
Lana D. Christiano ◽  
Dare V. Ajibade ◽  
James K. Liu

Author(s):  
Axel Wolf ◽  
Alexandros Andrianakis ◽  
Peter Valentin Tomazic ◽  
Michael Mokry ◽  
Georg Clarici ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To evaluate the frequency, type and indications of nasal turbinate (NT) resection during endoscopic, anterior skull base surgery and to analyze factors that may have an impact on the need of NT removal. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, 306 subjects (150 males and 156 females, mean age 55.4 ± 15.3 years) who underwent multidisciplinary, transnasal, endoscopic tumor surgery of the anterior skull base using 4-handed techniques between 2011 and 2019 at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical University of Graz, were included. Results In the majority of interventions (n = 281/306; 91.8%), all NT were preserved. Significant factors influencing the need of NT resections turned out to be type of endoscopic approach (p < 0.001; V = 0.304), sagittal (p = 0.003; d = 0.481) and transversal (p = 0.017; d = 0.533) tumor diameter, tumor type (p < 0.001; V = 0.355) and tumor location (p < 0.001; V = 0.324). Conclusions NT can be preserved in the majority of patients undergoing tumor resection in anterior, transnasal, skullbase surgery and routine resection of NT should be avoided. Variables that have an impact on the need of NT resections are types of endoscopic approaches, sagittal and transversal tumor extension and tumor type. These factors should be considered in planning of surgery and preoperative information of patients.


2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1763-1765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent L. Biron ◽  
Menachem Gross ◽  
Robert Broad ◽  
Hadi Seikaly ◽  
Erin D. Wright

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document