Degrees of Diaphragma Sellae Descent during Transsphenoidal Pituitary Adenoma Resection: Predictive Factors and Effect on Outcome
- 46 Downloads
This study is aimed to classify degrees of diaphragma sellae (DS) descent into sella turcica according to the surgical field block caused by the descent and to construct predictive imaging criteria for the degree of descent, and in addition, to determine whether there is any correlation between the degree of DS descent and the operative outcome (in the form of cerebrospinal fluid leak and/or presence of residual tumor). Totally, 72 patients were enrolled in our study. Their clinical and radiological data as well as the high definition videos of operations were retrospectively reviewed. The degree of DS descent during the operation was classified into five degrees according to surgical field block caused by the descent. We investigated the correlation between these five degrees and the clinical findings, radiological findings as well as the surgical outcomes. We found that the most important determining factors of DS descent degree were the volume and the height of the tumor portion above diaphragma opening. On the other hand, the total tumor volume, the maximum tumor height and the morphological pattern according to Wilson’s system (modified from Hardy) had no statistically significant correlation with DS degree of descent. Presence of residual tumor on postoperative magnetic resonance images was significantly correlated with Wilson’s classification and with supradiaphragmatic tumor height. On the other hand, cerebrospinal fluid leak showed no statistically significant difference between variable degrees of DS descent. Volumetric data of the tumor portion above the diaphragma opening are more important than morphological data for prediction of surgical field block caused by descended DS. While DS prolapse significantly increases the difficulty of the operative procedure, residual tumor presence is mainly dependent on morphological classification, especially cavernous sinus invasion.
Key wordsdiaphragma sellae pituitary macroadenoma transsphenoidal surgery cerebrospinal fluid leak
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Matsuyama J, Kawase T, Yoshida K, et al. Management of large and giant pituitary adenomas with suprasellar extensions. Asian J Neurosurg, 2010,5(1):48–53Google Scholar
- 4.Edward RL, Paul TB, John J. Transsphenoidal approach. In: Connolly ES, McKhann GM, Huang J, et al, eds. Fundamentals of operative techniques in neurosurgery. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme Medical, 2010:78–85Google Scholar
- 9.Daniels D, Pojunas K, Kilgore D, et al. MR of the diaphragm sellae. AJNR, 1986,7(5):765–769Google Scholar
- 10.Wei L, Xi Z, Lin S, et al. MRI research of diaphragma sellae in patients with pituitary adenoma. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015,8(8):12842–12849Google Scholar
- 11.Wilson C. Neurosurgical management of large and invasive pituitary tumors. In: Tindall G, Collins W, eds. Clinical management of pituitary disorders. New York: Raven Press, 1979:335–342Google Scholar
- 12.Hardy J. Transsphenoidal surgery of hypersecreting pituitary tumors. In: Kohler PO, Ross GT, eds. Diagnosis and treatment of pituitary tumors. New York: Excerpta Medica/American Elsevier, 1973:179–194Google Scholar
- 13.Hardy J. Transsphenoidal surgery of intracranial neoplasm. In: Thompson RA, Green R, eds. Adv Neurol. New York: Raven Press, 1976:261–274Google Scholar