Authored by Cristobal Langdon
Since the introduction of endonasal
endoscopic skull base surgery in the management of skull base neoplasms
the exclusive purpose has been to
increase survival rates. Recently, given the improved of the survival
rates, more attention has been focused on other aspects such as nasal
symptoms
and quality of life. The purpose of this review is to assess the current
evidence of functional outcomes after endoscopic skull base surgery.
Keywords:Endoscopic surgery, Skull base, Quality of life, Nasal symptoms
Extended endonasal endoscopic approaches (EEEA) for skull
base lesions have been increasing over the last decade. Determinants
for this development are the enhanced understanding of the
endoscopic anatomy, improvement of imaging systems and specific
instruments, and the use of vascularized flaps for reconstruction
[1]. This EEEA can cause postoperative morbidity related to the
reconstruction, like crusting and posterior rhinorrhea, especially in
those cases requiring an endonasal flap [2,3]. The healing process
start the first week with a reepithelization by stratified epithelium,
then hair cells appear in the third week and complete recovery
of the sinus epithelium occurs within 6-8 weeks [4]. Given this,
[5] conclude that one must wait at least three months to assess
the clinical and postoperative symptoms. Regarding quality of
life (QOL) after EEEA evidence have shown that the morbidity is
related to the extension of the approach. [6] reported a negative
impact in QOL after the use of nasoseptal flap which is commonly
associated to extended approaches. The latter was mainly due to
an increased tendency to headaches and reduced smell; however,
recovery occurs over time especially in those patients with
secreting pituitary tumors.
Since the use of endoscopic skull base surgery, there have been
great efforts to develop specific QOL questionnaires for EEEA and
pituitary surgery (Table 1) Until now, the following tests have
been applied in English literature; Quality of Life-Assessment of
Growth Hormone Deficiency in Adults [7], Hypopituitarism Quality
of Life Satisfaction (QLS-H) [8], Previous Skull Base Quality of Life
(ASB-QOL) [9], Hormone Deficiency-Dependent Quality of Life (
HDQOL) [10], Acromegaly Quality of Life (ACROQOL) [11], Pituitary
Adenoma Quality of Life (PA-QOL) [12], Cushing Quality of Life [13],
Addison Quality of Life (AddiQOL) [14], or ASK nasal inventory [15].
Handicaps for these tests are that they do not include specific areas
about quality of life and cancer, visual defects, hormonal deficiency
or sinonasal symptoms. Here, we will discuss the impact of EEEA
regarding the following topics:
1. Sinonasal symptoms.
2. Mucociliary clearance.
3. Quality of life.
4. Imaging findings.
Sinonasal symptoms
In the last decade, endoscopic skull base surgery has had
a massive development in terms of surgical experience and
technological advancement. Nowadays is it possible to address
larger and more complex tumors, as so, patients suffer large
anatomical and functional changes of the sinonasal cavity
postoperatively. It is in the first postoperative period (2-4 weeks)
when nasal symptoms are more evident, usually patients refer thick
anterior and posterior rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, facial pain and
headaches [16]. Currently nasal symptoms are measured according
to the visual analogue scale and/or by different questionnaires
such us the Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22), Rhinosinusitis
outcome measure (RSOM-31) and the Rhinosinusitis Disability
Index (ISDN).
In one of the first studies about posterior nasal symptoms in
skull base surgery, [3] observed that the most frequent finding
were nasal crusts (98%) one month postoperative and at least
half of the patients continue with nasal crusts for 3 months postsurgery.
The time of disappearance of the crusts was related to
the complexity of the surgery but not to the reconstruction of the
defect [2] reported that in the postoperative period 28% of patients
undergoing transsphenoidal and 64% undergoing extended surgery
had posterior rhinorrhea. Interestingly [17] compared the nasal
symptoms in patients undergoing endoscopic versus open surgery,
they observed that the endoscopic surgery group had a lower
score of nasal symptoms compared to the open approaches [18,19]
showed that the SNOT-22 total score and the nasal symptoms score
increased moderately in the immediate postoperative period but
subsequently returned to their preoperative values. The same was
reported by [16] who found that nasal symptoms significantly
improved over time, although posterior rhinorrhea persisted
during the first year after surgery.
Normal sense of smell requires the integrity of the olfactory
epithelium for proper functioning. Usually in cases of lateral or
anterior skull base surgery (without affecting cribriform plate)
is possible to preserve the olfactory mucosa. In cases where the
cribriform plate (with or without olfactory bulb resection) must
be resected or an EEEA is performed, the integrity of the olfactory
mucosa is affected almost entirely with the subsequent olfactory
dysfunction for the patient. To almost all the studies regarding
olfactory dysfunction after EEEA are made with olfactometry test
[20]. used the olfactometry test of the University of Pennsylvania
(UPSIT), before and after endoscopic endonasal hypophysectomy
in 45 patients. They observed that patients had a lower ability to
smell a month after surgery but after three months there were
no significant differences compare to preoperative scores [21]
did a prospective study with 36 patients and found no significant
differences between pre- and post-operative SNOT 20 scores
and visual analogue scale scores for nasal obstruction, actually
they showed a significant improvement of symptoms [2]. studied olfaction in 50 patients (36 with transsphenoidal and 14 with
extended surgery), they observed that patients undergoing
extended approach with nasoseptal flap reconstruction had
higher rate of olfactory dysfunction at 3 months compared to
patients undergoing transesphenoidal surgery. The same group
reported in a prospective study [22] that the smell impairment
and the increased posterior nasal discharge is present up to twelve
months after surgery. They also reported that the mucociliary
clearance time was prolonged after EEEA [23] assessed the longterm
olfactory outcomes between cold knife upper septal incision
technique compared to monopolar cautery in nasoseptal flap for
skull base reconstruction. They found no significant difference
in short-term or long-term, assessed by the UPSIT scores 1 year
after transnasal skull-base approaches [24], found in a systematic
review that endoscopic approach appears to be superior regarding
preservation of olfactory outcome when compared with the
microscopic approach, especially when the endoscopic approach
was performed without harvesting of the nasoseptal flap. Another
nasal complaint has been studied [25] in 41 patients undergoing
skull base surgery found nasal fossa synechia in 19.5%, internal
nasal valve failure in 14.6% and complaints of worsening of the
sense of smell in 39%.
Mucociliary clearance
Disruption of the mucociliary clearance (MCC), an important
mechanism of the innate immunity of the upper and lower airways,
predisposes to airway diseases [26].
The MCC could be altered for two reasons:
1. Misfunction in the movements of the cilia.
2. Dehydration of the mucus, which leads to increased
viscosity and therefore the ciliary clearance becomes ineffective.
In the first group we have primary (genetic) and secondary
(infection or inflammation) ciliary dyskinesia, while in the second
group we found cystic fibrosis, asthma among others. Many factors
influence the MCC, some can be derived from the environment,
like temperature and humidity, while others are specific to the
patient, e.g, trauma, smoking, viral infections, chronic sinusitis,
allergic rhinitis, deviated septum, sinus surgery, and cystic fibrosis
and asma [27]. At present, there is no gold standard test for MCC
analysis, although there are a variety of investigational methods
and techniques available.
The most commonly used method is the saccharine test [28].
Although it depends on a subjective factor, it gives a well-defined
time of MCC, since subjects clearly described the perception of
sweet taste. There are some who criticize the use of saccharin
particles as a measure of mucosal transport [29,30] but there are
studies that show a good correlation between the time of MCC
measured by saccharine test and ciliary beat frequency determined
by photometry [31,32] as well as, a significant negative correlation
with the transport speed measured by resin particles labeled with
99Tc [33]. The saccharine test is performed at ambient temperature,
where the patient is requested not to perform forced inspiration.
A 1 mm saccharin particle is applied in the 1 cm of the anterior
portion of the inferior turbinate. Patients are asked to report any
change in taste without advising them that they will receive a sweet
flavor. The time required by the patient to perceive sweetness is the
defining time of the test.
Few studies have assessed the impact of EEEA in the MCC
[2] studied the MCC in patients undergoing EEEA, they found
that patients had a prolonged MCC time until three months after
surgery. They also showed that the more extended the approached
was the MCC time was higher. On the other hand, several studies
have evaluated the effect of nasal surgery in MCC [34] showed
that the MCC improved in patients who had a septoplasty, with
no significant difference between the blocked nasal cavity and
the opposite side [35] evaluated MCC by saccharin test in three
groups of patients (septoplasty, endoscopic polypectomy and
turbinectomy) and observed that patients with preoperative
mucociliary dysfunction didn’t improve its function after surgery
[36] studied the improvement of MCC in 43 patients undergoing
endonasal endoscopic surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis with
or without polyposis, they noted that the MCC measured by the
saccharin test improved following endoscopic sinus surgery.
Quality of life
QOL is a multidimensional concept that measures the
relationship of a series of physical and psychosocial factors. It
describes the ability of an individual to make his life and get
satisfaction from it. As so, QOL assessments provide a patientreported
estimate of well-being and show their degree of comfort
and satisfaction [37]. The analysis of QOL is based on the patient’s
opinion about different aspects of his life that may have been
modified after the treatment. These dimensions or domains
include physical activity, psychological state, social interaction
and somatic perception [38,39]. The advantages and limitations
of endoscopic skull base surgery have been extensively studied
[40,41]. Based on the latter results often the surgical success is
defined as the balance between of maximal tumor resection and
minimal functional impact. In 2013, [42] developed and validated
the Anterior Skull Base Nasal Inventory-12 (ASK Nasal-12), a sitespecific
nasal morbidity instrument to assess patient-reported
outcomes following endonasal skull base surgery [43] designed
a multidimensional, disease-specific instrument, the Endoscopic
Endonasal Sinus and Skull Base Surgery Questionnaire (EES-Q),
they proved the importance of a multidimensional health related
QOL assessment in a prospective cohort study with 100 patients
showing how inconveniences in social functioning had the greatest
negative impact on postoperative health status rating 64.
Few studies have evaluated the organ specific functional
impairment and QOL; this is mainly due to the low prevalence
of the disease, high variability of localization of the tumors, and
the different surgical approaches and reconstruction methods
[44] were the first that used a generic questionnaire of QOL to study patients undergoing endoscopic pituitary surgery and
showed no difference in QOL when compared with patients who
underwent mastoidectomy [45] compared patients with pituitary
pathology with the healthy population. They found that patients
with acromegaly had impaired physical function while patients
with Cushing syndrome showed deterioration in all the evaluated
parameters except for one domain. Patients with prolactinoma
had mental deterioration, but patients with a non-functioning
adenoma presented impairments in the physical and mental
spheres [45,46] studied the QOL in patients undergoing pituitary
adenoma resection by endonasal endoscopic surgery; they showed
that these patients had mild postoperative deterioration on the
SF-36 [6] observed that patients with hormone-secreting tumors
had greater postsurgical impairment of QOL [2] observed similar
results to those previously mentioned; however, they did not find
differences between functioning and non-functioning adenomas.
Consistent with the latter study, [47] used the Rhinosinusitis
Disability Index and observed no differences between preoperative
and postoperative scores in patients with or without functioning
pituitary pathology [48] found lower QOL in six of eight domains
of SF 36 preoperatively but improved to baseline values on the long
run after surgery in seven of eight domains [47] used ASBS-Q and
SNOT 22 for evaluating the impact of ESBS for craniopharyngiomas
resection and shows an overall maintenance of postoperative
compared with preoperative QOL, better in patients with grosstotal
resection and radiation therapy, and worse in patients
with visual or endocrine deficits. Nevertheless, patients with
craniopharyngiomas still had worse QOL than those undergoing
similar surgery for pituitary macroadenomas.
Patients with extended endonasal approaches are a challenge,
since they are usually oncological patients with a significant
physical, cognitive, emotional or social deterioration [49]. It is
possible that these findings correlate more closely with adjuvant
treatments and oncological disease than the surgery itself. A metaanalysis
confirmed that patients undergoing oncologic disease have
a lower QOL compared to patients with benign tumors independent
of the type of surgical technique [42,50]. Assessed the QOL in
patients with sinonasal carcinomas after surgery and observed
that they had a significant deterioration in the domains of anxiety,
physical activity and emotional state [51] studied a cohort of 153
patients who received adjunctive therapy and found that they had
a worsening of their QOL which was more related to the adjuvant
therapy. Regarding the last point, [2] compared the impact of nasal
symptoms and QOL using the sinonasal symptoms test RSOM-31
and QOL test SF-36. They found that patients undergoing extended
endoscopic skull base surgery showed higher sinonasal symptoms
that patients undergoing pituitary surgery, and both had mild
impairment QOL assessed by the SF-36 questionnaire [52] showed
a temporary worsening during the first year of postoperative ESBS,
after which QOL recovers and returns almost to normal [53] in a
single-center prospective cohort study of patients with endoscopic
transsphenoidal skull base surgery conclude that sinonasal quality
of life worsened after 1 month postoperatively but returned to
preoperative levels after the second month and remained stable
after 5 months of follow up [54] also reported a recovery of QOL
after 6 months of ESBS [55] in a prospective cohort study with 145
patients with both malignant and benign sinonasal tumors, found
a statistically significant improvement in SNOT-22 score from
baseline to 2 years [56] observed that extended procedures and
NSF usage was significantly associated with poor outcomes.
Radiological findings
Postoperative imaging evaluation is one of the keystones
studies for monitoring patients undergoing skull base pathology. In
order to detect residual lesions, recurrence and/or complications,
the use of postoperative MRI is one of the fundamental pillars for
following patients undergoing skull base pathology.
Correct interpretation of radiological findings implies to know
how the healing process occurs in the sinonasal cavity, especially
the radiological differentiation of the nasoseptal flap healing
process and the differentiation between inflamed mucosa and
mucosa infiltrated by tumor. In general, MRI distinguishes normal
and inflamed soft tissues, and differentiates between these tissues
and tumor. The latter is primarily based on the fact that inflamed
mucosa is associated with increased submucosal oedema and
increased mucus secretions [57] used MRI to evaluate the viability
of the nasoseptal flap in the postoperative setting, they found that
flap is healthy when is hypo intense on both T1 and T2. Regarding
inflammatory tissue differentiation from tumor recurrence [58]
observed that the inflamed sinus mucosa is characterized by hypo
intensity on T1 and hyper intensity on T2. In contrast, the tumor
tissue is characterized by hypo intensity on both T1 and T2, but
to assess tumor tissue/recurrence, is better to assess images on
T2 sequence [59,60], found Increased sinus opacification between
the mean overall pre and [61-63]postoperative SNOT-22 scores
after 67.4 months. Regarding other imaging tests such as PET-CT,
one must keep in mind that inflamed cells also show increased
glycolytic activity [64-67], consequently inflamed areas cannot be
distinguishing with tumor tissue.
The endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery has evolved
dramatically, emerging as the treatments of choice in addressing
skull base pathology. While the main objective is tumor resection,
there is a growing interest on studying the functional outcome in
relation to the in QOL and nasal symptoms. Unfortunately, there
are still few studies to perform a standardization of methods that
measure functional outcomes after endoscopic skull base surgery.
In a future, longitudinal studies are needed to standardize the
measurement instruments of quality of life, nasal symptoms and
general symptoms suffered by these patients after surgery.
To read more about this article...Open access Journal of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
Please follow the URL to access more information about this article
https://irispublishers.com/ojor/fulltext/functional-outcomes-in-endoscopic-endonasal-surgery-of-the-skull-base-a-rising-challenge.ID.000520.php
Please follow the URL to access more information about this article
https://irispublishers.com/ojor/fulltext/functional-outcomes-in-endoscopic-endonasal-surgery-of-the-skull-base-a-rising-challenge.ID.000520.php
To know more about our Journals....Iris Publishers
To know about Open Access publisher
endoscopic skull base surgery
ReplyDeleteDr.kalyan Bommakanti, Hyderabad, India (+91-8520003683-WhatsApp only for an appointment).Keyhole spine surgery Hyderabad is an advanced and new technology to minimize collateral damage to bones, muscles, and nerves. After a successful surgery, you will be able to walk immediately. Get the answer » · How does keyhole surgery work? During endoscopic spine surgery, in order to minimize interruption to muscles and tissue, the surgeon gains access to the vertebrae by placing a series of tubes. Radiofrequency vaporizes the herniated tissue.
to get more - https://www.youtube.com/user/drkalyan100