Combined petrosal approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical complications

Transpetrosal approaches are known to be associated with a significant risk of complications, including CSF leak, facial palsy, hearing impairment, venous injury, and/or temporal lobe injury. We aimed to evaluate the morbidity of the standard combined petrosal approach (CPA), defined as a combination of the posterior (retrolabyrinthine) and the anterior petrosal approach. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles reporting on clinical series of patients operated on for petroclival meningiomas through CPA. Studies that used the terminology "combined petrosal approach" without matching the aforementioned definition were excluded as well as clinical series that included less than 5 patients. A total of 8 studies were included involving 160 patients. The pooled complication rates were 3% (95% CI, 0.5-5.6) for CSF leak, 8.6% (95% CI, 4.1-13.2%) for facial palsy, 8.2% (95% CI, 3.9-12.6%) for hearing impairment, 2.8% (95% CI, 0.9-6.5%) for venous complications, and finally 4.8% (95%, 1.2-8.4%) for temporal lobe injury. Contrary to the general belief, CPA is associated with an acceptable rate of complications, especially when compared to alternative approaches to the petroclival area. In view of the major advantages like shorter trajectory, multiple angles of surgical attack, and early tumor devascularization, CPA remains an important tool in the armamentarium of the skull base surgeon.

Combined Petrosal Approach for Resection of a Large Trigeminal Schwannoma With Meckel's Cave Involvement-Part II: Microsurgical Approach and Tumor Resection: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

This video is the second part of a 2-part video presentation demonstrating the microsurgical technique of a combined petrosal approach for resection of a large trigeminal schwannoma in a 54-yr-old woman involving multiple cranial fossae extending anteriorly into Meckel's cave. The patient presented with long-standing worsening headache and facial tingling and numbness. After discussing the benefits and risks of the surgery as well as the alternative management strategies, the patient decided to proceed with surgery and informed consent was obtained. The surgery was performed in a single stage. The technical nuances of anterior and posterior (retrolabyrinthine) petrosectomy are demonstrated and discussed. Microsurgical resection of the tumor is also demonstrated emphasizing the important steps of dural opening, arachnoid dissection, identification and preservation of cranial nerves, and exploration of Meckel's cave. Use of endoscopic-assistance for visualization of the cerebellopontine angle and neurovascular structures is also demonstrated.  Table in video reprinted by permission from Copyright Clearance Center: Springer Nature, Acta Neurochirurgica, Frontotemporal epidural approach to trigeminal neurinomas, Dolenc VV, Copyright 1994.

Combined Petrosal Approach for Resection of a Large Trigeminal Schwannoma With Meckel's Cave Involvement-Part I: Anatomic Rationale and Analysis: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

Resection of large trigeminal schwannomas involving both posterior and middle cranial fossae is challenging. The depth of the surgical target in the superomedial corner of the cerebellopontine angle and the petrous apex makes for a difficult lesion to favorably access, expose, and safely resect. Judicious planning of a skull base approach is therefore the most crucial step in successful management of these formidable tumors. When properly chosen, planned, and executed, the combined petrosal approach sets the stage for an optimal exposure of such tumors that involve both posterior and middle cranial fossae. The present video is the first of a 2-part video presentation that explains the anatomic rationale of selecting a combined petrosal approach (anterior petrosectomy and retrolabyrinthine petrosectomy) for the resection of a large trigeminal schwannoma involving the posterior and middle cranial fossae with an extension into Meckel's cave in a 54-yr-old female presenting with 5-yr history of increasing headaches, left-sided face numbness, and disequilibrium. The benefits, risks, and alternatives of the surgical procedure were discussed in detail with the patient and she consented to proceed with surgery. Part I also discusses the important nuances of positioning the patient, as well as planning and execution of the skin incision, including pericranial flap harvesting.  Of note, the patient consented to the publication of images obtained from her.

Comparison of surgical exposure and maneuverability associated with microscopy and endoscopy in the retrolabyrinthine and transcrusal approaches to the retrochiasmatic region: a cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

The retrolabyrinthine and transcrusal approaches (RLA and TCA, respectively) are the two most often used posterior transpetrosal approaches that are used to treat lesions in the retrochiasmatic region. Endoscopes are increasingly used in neurosurgical practice. To determine whether a difference exists between the two transpetrosal approaches in the retrochiasmatic region, we evaluated and compared the exposure and maneuverability associated with the microscope and the endoscope in these approaches.

METHODS

Seven formalin-fixed cadaveric heads were dissected bilaterally through the two approaches: four for evaluation and three injected with colored latex for photography. The retrochiasmatic region was divided into four sub-compartments: the compartment before the infundibulum, which was further divided into two parts, (1) the ipsilateral and (2) the contralateral compartments; (3) the retroinfundibulum compartment; (4) the third ventricle. After each approach, exposure and maneuverability of the structures in these four compartments obtained by microscopy and endoscopy were scored under a guidance of a numerical grading system for further comparison.

RESULTS

The TCA provided better exposure and maneuverability at the retrochiasmatic region than the RLA in both the microscopy model [scores of 39.75 ± 2.12 and 32.38 ± 2.56 respectively (p < 0.05)] and the endoscopy model [scores of 82.13 ± 3.40 and 43.75 ± 1.67 respectively (p < 0.05)].

CONCLUSIONS

The TCA is better than the RLA at offering exposure and manipulation to structures in the retrochiasmatic region, especially in patients whose lesion is located high into the third ventricle and/or expanded into the contralateral part. Endoscopes may be helpful in TCA in terms of exposing and maneuvering structures in the contralateral and interpeduncle fossa areas. However, in RLA, not enough room is available for simultaneously maneuvering an endoscope and a surgical instrument.