Eyebrow craniotomy for anterior skull base lesions: how I do it

Selection Strategy for Optimal Keyhole Approaches for Middle Cerebral Artery Aneurysms: Lateral Supraorbital Versus Minipterional Craniotomy

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The lateral supraorbital (LS) and minipterional (MP) approaches have been reported for treating intracranial aneurysms as alternative to the pterional approach. We describe our decision making for selecting the minicraniotomy, LS versus MP, for managing noncomplex aneurysms of the middle cerebral artery (MCA), based on the depth of the aneurysm within the Sylvian fissure.

METHODS

We report on a consecutive case series of 50 patients who underwent clipping of 54 ruptured/unruptured MCA aneurysms by means of LS or MP craniotomies. The distance between the MCA (M1) origin and the aneurysmal neck is key to selection of the approach: LS was used for MCA aneurysms <15 mm from the M1 origin and MP for MCA aneurysms ≥15 mm from the M1 origin.

RESULTS

11 of 50 patients presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage (10 ruptured MCA aneurysms). Overall, 59 aneurysms were successfully clipped (54 of the MCA). The mean distance between the M1 origin and the aneurysmal neck was 10.1 mm (range, 4-17 mm) for patients treated by LS and 20 mm (range, 15-30 mm) for those treated by MP. All but 1 MCA aneurysms were successfully treated. At last follow-up (mean, 14 months), no reperfusion of the clipped aneurysms was observed.

CONCLUSION

Our strategy for selecting the keyhole approach based on the depth of the aneurysm within the Sylvian fissure is efficient and safe. We suggest the use of the LS approach when the aneurysm is <15 mm from the M1 origin and the MP approach when the aneurysm is ≥15 mm from the M1 origin.

How I do it-the eyebrow approach for anterior circle of Willis aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The eyebrow approach is a keyhole technique that gives a wide access to the anterior circle of Willis.

METHODS

A 4-cm linear incision is placed in the upper limit of the eyebrow and a small supraorbital bone flap is raised. A wide arachnoid dissection is essential to maximize the working space. One or multiple aneurysms may be treated by the same approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The eyebrow approach is a safe technique for selected aneurysms of the anterior circle of Willis.

The evolving role of the oculoplastic surgeon in skull base surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Classical orbital approaches in skull base surgery have involved large incisions with extensive bone removal resulting in prolonged recovery with associated morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this review is to explore recent advances in skull base surgery that are applicable to the orbital surgeon.

RECENT FINDINGS

Transnasal endoscopic surgery provides access to the medial 180 degrees of the orbit. Access to the lateral 180 degrees may be obtained using transmaxillary and transcranial techniques. Transorbital approaches and multiport techniques further expand the reach of the skull base surgeon. These minimally invasive techniques are supplanting the classical pterional, frontotemporal, frontotemporal orbitozygomatic, frontal, and subfrontal approaches.

SUMMARY

The role of the orbital surgeon in skull base surgery is changing. Transnasal and transcranial approaches to orbital disorders using minimally invasive techniques are becoming more common. In addition, transorbital access to the skull base, paranasal sinuses, and anterior and middle cranial fossa is offering new opportunities for the orbital surgeon.

The supraorbital keyhole approach: how I do it

BACKGROUND

Improvements in image guidance, endoscopy, and instruments, have significantly advanced "keyhole" neurosurgery. We describe the concept and technique of the supraorbital keyhole approach.

METHODS

The supraorbital keyhole approach is performed through an eyebrow skin incision. Image guidance may be used to define the optimal surgical trajectory. A limited supraorbital craniotomy is fashioned. The frontal lobe is mobilized and the central skull base approached, without the need for brain retractors. Endoscopy is used to enhance visualization, and tube-shaft instruments to improve manipulation through the narrow surgical corridor.

CONCLUSIONS

The supraorbital keyhole approach provides a safe method to access selected skull base lesions.

Quantifying surgical access in eyebrow craniotomy with and without orbital bar removal: cadaver and surgical phantom studies

BACKGROUND

Eyebrow craniotomy is a recently described minimally invasive approach for tackling primarily pathology of the anterior skull base. The removal of the orbital bar may further expand the surgical corridor of this exposure, but the extent of benefit is poorly quantified. We assessed the effect of orbital bar removal with regards to surgical access in the eyebrow craniotomy using classic morphometric measurements in cadaver heads. Using surgical phantoms and neuronavigation, we also measured the 'working volume', a new parameter for characterising the volume of surgical access in these approaches.

METHODS

Silicon injected cadaver heads (n = 5) were used for morphometric analysis of the eyebrow craniotomy with and without orbital bar removal. Working depths and 'working areas' of surgical access were measured as defined by key anatomical landmarks. The eyebrow craniotomy with or without orbital bar removal was also simulated using surgical phantoms (n = 3, 90-120 points per trial), calibrated against a frameless neuronavigation system. Working volume was derived from reference coordinates recorded along the anatomical borders of the eyebrow craniotomy using the "α-shape algorithm" in R statistics.

RESULTS

In cadaver heads, eyebrow craniotomy with removal of the orbital bar reduced the working depth to the ipsilateral anterior clinoid process (42 ± 2 versus 33 ± 3 mm; p < 0.05), but the working areas as defined by deep neurovascular and bony landmarks was statistically unchanged (total working areas of 418 ± 80 cm(2) versus 334 ± 48 cm(2); p = 0.4). In surgical phantom studies, however, working-volume for the simulated eyebrow craniotomies was increased with orbital bar removal (16 ± 1 cm(3) versus 21 ± 1 cm(3); p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In laboratory studies, orbital bar removal in eyebrow craniotomy provides a modest reduction in working depth and increase in the working volume. But this must be weighed up against the added morbidity of the procedure. Working volume, a newly developed parameter may provide a more meaningful endpoint for characterising the surgical access for different surgical approaches and it could be applied to other operative cases undertaken with frameless neuronavigation.