Extradural minipterional approach for giant intracranial aneurysms

Cranial nerve palsies and intracranial aneurysms: A narrative review of patterns and outcomes

Background

Cranial nerve palsy (CNP) in patients with intracranial aneurysms (IAs) can impose significant burdens on a patient's quality of life. The literature has a paucity of reviews addressing patterns of overall reported cranial nerve (CN) involvement and outcomes in patients with IA.

Methods

The literature systematically reviewed CNP at presentation in the setting of IA using PubMed, Web-of-Science, and Scopus according to the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Fifty-two studies reported a total of 513 patients with IA and 630 CNPs observed at presentation: oculomotor (58.25%), abducent (15.87%), optic (12.06%), trochlear (8.7%), and trigeminal (1.9%). Most common aneurysms are located in a posterior communicating artery (46%) and cavernous internal carotid artery (29.2%). Trends of CNP based on the rupture status of IAs showed that 80% were associated with unruptured IAs and 20% with ruptured IAs. Post-treatment of IA, 55% of patients had complete resolution of CNP, with most (89%; n = 134) resolving within the first 6 months. Stratified by CNP type: Complete resolution rate is 100% in CN VII-IX, 60% in CN VI, 59% in CN IV, 54% in CN III, 45% in CN V, and 43% in CN II.

Conclusion

In patients with cranial nerve palsies attributed to IAs, the location and rupture status of the aneurysm could determine the type and severity of the nerve palsy. Most patients experienced favorable outcomes in terms of their resolution and long-term function of the CNP after treatment of the IA.

'What's in a name', a systematic review of the pterional craniotomy for aneurysm surgery and its many modifications with a proposal for simplified nomenclature

BACKGROUND

The pterional or frontosphenotemporal craniotomy has stood the test of time and continues to be a commonly used method of managing a variety of neurosurgical pathology. Already described in the beginning of the twentieth century and perfected by Yasargil in the 1970s, it has seen many modifications. These modifications have been a normal evolution for most neurosurgeons, tailoring the craniotomy to the patients' specific anatomy and pathology. Nonetheless, an abundance of variations have appeared in the literature.

METHODS

A search strategy was devised according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. To identify articles investigating the variations in the pterional approach, the following search terms were applied: (pterional OR minipterional OR supraorbital) AND (approach OR craniotomy OR technique).

RESULTS

In total, 3552 articles were screened with 74 articles being read in full with 47 articles being included for review. Each article was examined according the name of the technique, temporalis dissection technique, craniotomy technique and approach.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review gives an overview of the different techniques and modifications to the pterional craniotomy since it was initially described. We advocate for the use of a more standardised nomenclature that focuses on the target zone to simplify the management approach to supratentorial aneurysms.