Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal surgery for the treatment of pituitary adenoma: a meta-analysis

Clinical study on the selection of endoscopes and microscopes for transsphenoidal surgery of non-aggressive pituitary macroadenoma and microadenoma and the influencing factors of hyposmia after endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery

Background and objective

Transsphenoidal surgery, including endoscopic and microscopic resection, is the first choice of treatment for pituitary tumors. With the widespread application of neuroendoscopy in recent decades, there has been a trend to replace microscopes. In clinical practice, we have found that in transsphenoidal surgery for non-invasive microadenomas and macroadenomas, microscopy can achieve a higher total resection rate, shorter operation time, lower incidence of postoperative complications, and faster recovery of olfaction. This study aimed to explore the selection of endoscopes and microscopes for non-aggressive transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas and the factors affecting olfactory recovery.

Methods

From August 2019 to October 2022, 93 patients with non-aggressive microadenomas and macroadenomas via the transsphenoidal approach were selected from the First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University and treated with rich experience in pituitary tumor subspecialty microscopy and endoscopic surgery. Different surgical methods were used to divide the patients into microscopic (n = 35) and endoscopic (n = 58) groups. The total tumor removal rate, intraoperative blood loss, operation time and cost, postoperative hospital stay, recovery of visual function, postoperative changes in hormone levels, complication rate, and recovery from complications 3 months after the operation were compared between the two groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in the tumor removal rate, postoperative visual acuity, and visual field recovery between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference in the recovery rate of olfactory function between the two groups 3 months after the operation (p < 0.05), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of other complications (p > 0.05); Compared with the two groups, the microscope group had shorter operation time, longer postoperative hospital stay, less average operation cost and less blood loss, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The position of the nasal septum mucosal flap incision was a risk factor for hyposmia 3 months after the operation.

Conclusion

Microsurgery and endoscopic surgery are suitable surgical treatments for nonaggressive microadenomas and macroadenomas. The total tumor removal and postoperative hormone remission rates of the two surgical methods were approximately the same. However, the microsurgery group had a shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, faster olfactory function recovery, and a lower average operation cost. The position of the nasal septal mucosal flap incision was a risk factor for hyposmia at 3 months postoperatively. Hyposmia is less likely to occur when the superior edge of the nasal septal mucosal flap incision is not higher than the lower edge of the ipsilateral superior turbinate.

Current and Future Perspectives of Microscopic and Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery for Pituitary Adenomas: A Narrative Review

Transsphenoidal resection remains the standard treatment for most pituitary adenomas. However, the ideal surgical approach to safely access these lesions, either microsurgical or endoscopic, continues to be debated. Since the introduction of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery, centers around the world have increasingly adopted this technique, experiencing a shift away from the conventional microsurgical approach. Large series reporting the efficacy and safety of endoscopic surgery have fueled a growing interest in comparing clinical outcomes between both approaches. Still, proving superiority of either surgical approach remains an elusive task due to the inherent drawbacks of surgical observational studies, as we are still faced with a growing body of evidence reporting conflicting results. Thus, a comprehensive discussion regarding the reach and limitations of both techniques becomes necessary. In this narrative review, we perform a critical appraisal of the literature and provide an expert opinion on the state-of-the-art in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas. The advantages and limitations of each approach are assessed and compared from a technical standpoint, and their reported outcomes evaluated in the framework of this transition phase. Available evidence should be interpreted in light of individual patient characteristics and within the context of each medical center, taking into consideration the known impact that surgical expertise and multidisciplinary management hold on clinical outcomes.

A Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched Assessment of Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Approaches in the Management of Pituitary Adenomas

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is considerable controversy as to which of the 2 operating modalities (microsurgical or endoscopic transnasal surgery) currently used to resect pituitary adenomas (PAs) is the safest and most effective intervention. We compared rates of clinical outcomes of patients with PAs who underwent resection by either microsurgical or endoscopic transnasal surgery.

METHODS

To independently assess the outcomes of each modality type, we sought to isolate endoscopic and microscopic PA surgeries with a 1:1 tight-caliper (0.01) propensity score-matched analysis using a multicenter, neurosurgery-specific database. Surgeries were performed between 2017 and 2020, with data collected retrospectively from 12 international institutions on 4 continents. Matching was based on age, previous neurological deficit, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, tumor functionality, tumor size, and Knosp score. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Among a pool of 2826 patients, propensity score matching resulted in 600 patients from 9 surgery centers being analyzed. Multivariate analysis showed that microscopic surgery had a 1.91 odds ratio (OR) ( P = .03) of gross total resection (GTR) and shorter operative duration ( P < .01). However, microscopic surgery also had a 7.82 OR ( P < .01) for intensive care unit stay, 2.08 OR ( P < .01) for intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, 2.47 OR ( P = .02) for postoperative syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH), and was an independent predictor for longer postoperative stay (β = 2.01, P < .01). Overall, no differences in postoperative complications or 3- to 6-month outcomes were seen by surgical approach.

CONCLUSION

Our international, multicenter matched analysis suggests microscopic approaches for pituitary tumor resection may offer better GTR rates, albeit with increased intensive care unit stay, CSF leak, SIADH, and hospital utilization. Better prospective studies can further validate these findings as matching patients for outcome analysis remains challenging. These results may provide insight into surgical benchmarks at different centers, offer room for further registry studies, and identify best practices.