首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Neurologia medico-chirurgica >Transoral vs. Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Clival/Upper Cervical Chordoma
【2h】

Transoral vs. Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Clival/Upper Cervical Chordoma

机译:经口vs.内窥镜鼻腔入路治疗脊柱/颈上脊索瘤

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The surgical results of 18 cases of clival/upper cervical chordoma treated in the last decade via the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA, 9 cases) and the transoral-transpalatal approach (TO-TPA, 9 cases) were compared. Each group showed the same incidence of subdural invasion, with 5 cases each. The superior (frontal base) and lateral surgical fields were wider by EEA, but the inferior view lower than the cranio-vertebral junction (CVJ) was wider by TO-TPA. Gross total removal was achieved in 3 cases in the EEA group, but in only 1 case in the TO-TPA group. Differences in radicality might be due to the extent of the lateral and subdural overview. However for large tumors extending below the CVJ, TO-TPA was the only viable approach for surgical removal. Surgical complications were higher in the EEA (4 cases) than the TO-TPA group (1 case), and were mainly caused by aggressive management of subdural invasion in the EEA group. Post-operative oral intake was earlier and the operative time was shorter in the EEA group. The surgical results were more radical and less invasive in the EEA group than the TO-TPA group. However in tumors extending below the CVJ, the surgical field in EEA was limited, indicating the need to use the transoral route or a combination of routes. A higher complication rate following subdural management was a negative factor that requires improvement in the EEA group and two-staged EEA followed by a transcranial approach may be considered for the cases with subdural invasion.
机译:比较过去十年中经内镜鼻腔内入路(EEA,9例)和经口-经pal椎入路(TO-TPA,9例)治疗的18例上颌骨脊索瘤的手术结果。每组显示相同的硬膜下浸润发生率,每组5例。 EEA扩大了上(前基底)和外侧手术视野,但TO-TPA的下视野比颅骨-椎体交界处(CVJ)低。 EEA组中有3例实现了总清除量,而TO-TPA组中只有1例。根本性上的差异可能是由于外侧和硬脑膜概览的范围所致。但是,对于在CVJ以下延伸的大肿瘤,TO-TPA是唯一可行的手术切除方法。 EEA组(4例)的手术并发症高于TO-TPA组(1例),主要是由于积极管理EEA组硬膜下浸润引起的。 EEA组的术后口服摄入量较早,手术时间较短。与TO-TPA组相比,EEA组的外科手术结果更为激进,侵入性更小。但是,在延伸到CVJ以下的肿瘤中,EEA的手术范围有限,这表明需要使用经口途径或途径结合。硬膜下处理后并发症的发生率较高是一个不利因素,需要对EEA组进行改善,对于硬膜下侵犯病例,可以考虑采用两阶段EEA,然后经颅入路。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号