For COVID-19 vaccine updates, please review our information guide. For patient eligibility and scheduling availability, please visit VaccineTogetherNY.org.

Limitations of the endonasal endoscopic approach in treating olfactory groove meningiomas. A systematic review.

TitleLimitations of the endonasal endoscopic approach in treating olfactory groove meningiomas. A systematic review.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2017
AuthorsShetty SRaviraj, Ruiz-Treviño AS, Omay SBulent, Almeida JPaulo, Liang B, Chen Y-N, Singh H, Schwartz TH
JournalActa Neurochir (Wien)
Volume159
Issue10
Pagination1875-1885
Date Published2017 10
ISSN0942-0940
KeywordsCohort Studies, Humans, Meningeal Neoplasms, Meningioma, Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Olfaction Disorders, Postoperative Complications, Postoperative Period, Smell, Treatment Outcome
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review current management strategies for olfactory groove meningioma (OGM)s and the recent literature comparing endoscopic endonasal (EEA) with traditional transcranial (TCA) approaches.

METHODS: A PubMed search of the recent literature (2011-2016) was performed to examine outcomes following EEA and TCA for OGM. The extent of resection, visual outcome, postoperative complications and recurrence rates were analyzed using percentages and proportions, the Fischer exact test and the Student's t-test using Graphpad PRISM 7.0Aa (San Diego, CA) software.

RESULTS: There were 444 patients in the TCA group with a mean diameter of 4.61 (±1.17) cm and 101 patients in the EEA group with a mean diameter of 3.55 (± 0.58) cm (p = 0.0589). GTR was achieved in 90.9% (404/444) in the TCA group and 70.2% (71/101) in the EEA group (p < 0.0001). Of the patients with preoperative visual disturbances, 80.7% (21/26) of patients in the EEA cohort had an improvement in vision compared to 12.83%(29/226) in the TCA group (p < 0.0001). Olfaction was lost in 61% of TCA and in 100% of EEA patients. CSF leaks and meningitis occurred in 25.7% and 4.95% of EEA patients and 6.3% and 1.12% of TCA patients, respectively (p < 0.0001; p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS: Our updated literature review demonstrates that despite more experience with endoscopic resection and skull base reconstruction, the literature still supports TCA over EEA with respect to the extent of resection and complications. EEA may be an option in selected cases where visual improvement is the main goal of surgery and postoperative anosmia is acceptable to the patient or in medium-sized tumors with existing preoperative anosmia. Nevertheless, based on our results, it seems more prudent at this time to use TCA for the majority of OGMs.

DOI10.1007/s00701-017-3303-0
Alternate JournalActa Neurochir (Wien)
PubMed ID28831590