Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting extent of resection in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma

  • Original Article - Pituitaries
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The extent of resection (EOR) is a crucial outcome parameter in transsphenoidal pituitary surgery (TSS), and is linked to endocrinological outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality. We aimed to build a robust, quantitative, and easily reproducible imaging score able to predict EOR in TSS.

Methods

The ratio (R) between the maximum horizontal adenoma diameter and intercarotid distance at the horizontal C4 segment was used to stratify our patient series in four classes: class I R ≤ 0.75, class II 0.75 < R ≤ 1.25, and class III R ≥ 1.25. Class IV included adenomas which completely encased the internal carotid artery. The resulting score was internally validated for robustness.

Results

One hundred sixteen patients were included in the study, of which 96 (83%) for derivation and 20 (17%) for validation. EOR showed significant differences between grades (grade I, 100%; II, 97.9%; III, 94.2%; IV, 87.2%; all P < 0.05). The same applied to residual volume (RV) (grade I, 0 cm3; II, 0.08 cm3; III, 1.11 cm3; IV, 1.63 cm3; all P < 0.05). Differences in gross total resection (GTR) were statistically significant among classes I, II, and III (P < 0.05). The incidence of residual adenoma in the cavernous sinus increased also constantly from grade I up to grade IV although a significant difference was only found between grades III and II (P = 0.004). The score performed equally well in the validation cohort. Inter-observer agreement was high, with intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.89 for measurement of both the horizontal tumor diameter and the ICD among two independent raters (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The proposed score is a simple and reproducible tool which reliably predicts surgical outcome including EOR, RV, and GTR of pituitary adenoma patients undergoing TSS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Banu MA, Rathman A, Patel KS, Souweidane MM, Anand VK, Greenfield JP, Schwartz TH (2014) Corridor-based endonasal endoscopic surgery for pediatric skull base pathology with detailed radioanatomic measurements. Neurosurgery 10(Suppl 2):273–293; discussion 293. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bouthillier A, van Loveren HR, Keller JT (1996) Segments of the internal carotid artery: a new classification. Neurosurgery 38:425–432 discussion 432-433

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cebula H, Kurbanov A, Zimmer LA, Poczos P, Leach JL, De Battista JC, Froelich S, Theodosopoulos PV, Keller JT (2014) Endoscopic, endonasal variability in the anatomy of the internal carotid artery. World Neurosurg 82:e759–e764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.09.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Conrad J, Ayyad A, Wüster C, Omran W, Weber MM, Konerding MA, Müller-Forell W, Giese A, Oertel J (2016) Binostril versus mononostril approaches in endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery: clinical evaluation and cadaver study. J Neurosurg 125:334–345. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.6.JNS142637

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dallapiazza RF, Grober Y, Starke RM, Laws ER, Jane JA (2015) Long-term results of endonasal endoscopic transsphenoidal resection of nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas. Neurosurgery 76:42–52; discussion 52-53. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dehdashti AR, Ganna A, Karabatsou K, Gentili F (2008) Pure endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenomas: early surgical results in 200 patients and comparison with previous microsurgical series. Neurosurgery 62:1006–1015; discussion 1015-1017. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000325862.83961.12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dhandapani S, Singh H, Negm HM, Cohen S, Anand VK, Schwartz TH (2016) Cavernous sinus invasion in pituitary adenomas: systematic review and pooled data meta-analysis of radiologic criteria and comparison of endoscopic and microscopic surgery. World Neurosurg 96:36–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.08.088

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Elhadi AM, Hardesty DA, Zaidi HA, Kalani MYS, Nakaji P, White WL, Preul MC, Little AS (2015) Evaluation of surgical freedom for microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal approaches to the sella. Neurosurgery 11(Suppl 2):69–78; discussion 78-79. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hardy J, Vezina JL (1976) Transsphenoidal neurosurgery of intracranial neoplasm. Adv Neurol 15:261–273

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hardy J, Wigser SM (1965) Trans-sphenoidal surgery of pituitary fossa tumors with televised radiofluoroscopic control. J Neurosurg 23:612–619. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1965.23.6.0612

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hofstetter CP, Nanaszko MJ, Mubita LL, Tsiouris J, Anand VK, Schwartz TH (2012) Volumetric classification of pituitary macroadenomas predicts outcome and morbidity following endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery. Pituitary 15:450–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-011-0350-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Juraschka K, Khan OH, Godoy BL, Monsalves E, Kilian A, Krischek B, Ghare A, Vescan A, Gentili F, Zadeh G (2014) Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach to large and giant pituitary adenomas: institutional experience and predictors of extent of resection. J Neurosurg 121:75–83. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.3.JNS131679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanter AS, Dumont AS, Asthagiri AR, Oskouian RJ, Jane JA, Laws ER (2005) The transsphenoidal approach. A historical perspective. Neurosurg Focus 18:e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Knosp E, Steiner E, Kitz K, Matula C (1993) Pituitary adenomas with invasion of the cavernous sinus space: a magnetic resonance imaging classification compared with surgical findings. Neurosurgery 33:610–617 discussion 617-618

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Meij BP, Lopes M-BS, Ellegala DB, Alden TD, Laws ER (2002) The long-term significance of microscopic dural invasion in 354 patients with pituitary adenomas treated with transsphenoidal surgery. J Neurosurg 96:195–208. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2002.96.2.0195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Micko ASG, Wöhrer A, Wolfsberger S, Knosp E (2015) Invasion of the cavernous sinus space in pituitary adenomas: endoscopic verification and its correlation with an MRI-based classification. J Neurosurg 122:803–811. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.12.JNS141083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mooney MA, Hardesty DA, Sheehy JP, Bird R, Chapple K, White WL, Little AS (2016) Interrater and intrarater reliability of the Knosp scale for pituitary adenoma grading. J Neurosurg 126:1714–1719. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.3.JNS153044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Negm HM, Al-Mahfoudh R, Pai M, Singh H, Cohen S, Dhandapani S, Anand VK, Schwartz TH (2016) Reoperative endoscopic endonasal surgery for residual or recurrent pituitary adenomas. J Neurosurg:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.8.JNS152709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nishioka H, Hara T, Nagata Y, Fukuhara N, Yamaguchi-Okada M, Yamada S (2017) Inherent tumor characteristics that limit effective and safe resection of giant nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. World Neurosurg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.07.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Perondi GE, Isolan GR, de Aguiar PHP, Stefani MA, Falcetta EF (2013) Endoscopic anatomy of sellar region. Pituitary 16:251–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-012-0413-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Serra C, Burkhardt J-K, Esposito G, Bozinov O, Pangalu A, Valavanis A, Holzmann D, Schmid C, Regli L (2016) Pituitary surgery and volumetric assessment of extent of resection: a paradigm shift in the use of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Neurosurg Focus 40:E17. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.12.FOCUS15564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Serra C, Maldaner N, Muscas G, Staartjes V, Pangalu A, Holzmann D, Soyka M, Schmid C, Regli L (2017) The changing sella: internal carotid artery shift during transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. Pituitary:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-017-0830-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sughrue ME, Chang EF, Gabriel RA, Aghi MK, Blevins LS (2011) Excess mortality for patients with residual disease following resection of pituitary adenomas. Pituitary 14:276–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-011-0308-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sylvester PT, Evans JA, Zipfel GJ, Chole RA, Uppaluri R, Haughey BH, Getz AE, Silverstein J, Rich KM, Kim AH, Dacey RG, Chicoine MR (2015) Combined high-field intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopy increase extent of resection and progression-free survival for pituitary adenomas. Pituitary 18:72–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-014-0560-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Taniguchi M, Hosoda K, Akutsu N, Takahashi Y, Kohmura E (2015) Endoscopic endonasal transsellar approach for laterally extended pituitary adenomas: volumetric analysis of cavernous sinus invasion. Pituitary 18:518–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-014-0604-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Woodworth GF, Patel KS, Shin B, Burkhardt J-K, Tsiouris AJ, McCoul ED, Anand VK, Schwartz TH (2014) Surgical outcomes using a medial-to-lateral endonasal endoscopic approach to pituitary adenomas invading the cavernous sinus. J Neurosurg 120:1086–1094. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.1.JNS131228

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Jorn Fierstra, MD, PhD, and Bas van Niftrik, MD, for their independent measurements used for the assessment of interrater agreement, and Nicola Podda for his graphical work (Fig. 2).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Carlo Serra and Victor E. Staartjes contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland

    Carlo Serra, Victor E. Staartjes, Nicolai Maldaner, Kevin Akeret & Luca Regli

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Tuscany School of Neurosurgery, University of Firenze, Florence, Italy

    Giovanni Muscas

  3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    David Holzmann & Michael B. Soyka

  4. Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Christoph Schmid

Authors
  1. Carlo Serra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victor E. Staartjes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicolai Maldaner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giovanni Muscas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kevin Akeret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David Holzmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael B. Soyka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christoph Schmid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Luca Regli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Serra.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Cantonal Ethics Committee Zürich, KEK St-V-Nr 2015-0142) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Pituitaries

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary Table 1

Surgical results at 3 months follow up. Values are given separately for both the derivation and validation cohort. IQR, interquartile range; SD, standard deviation; CSS, cavernous sinus space. (DOCX 13 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Serra, C., Staartjes, V.E., Maldaner, N. et al. Predicting extent of resection in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma. Acta Neurochir 160, 2255–2262 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-018-3690-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-018-3690-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation