The Interhemispheric Approach for Ventricular and Periventricular Lesions

  • B. Meyer
  • K. Schaller
  • V. Rohde
  • W. E. Hassler
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Neurosurgery book series (NEURO, volume 22)


Since the introduction [4, 5] of the two basic surgical principles for lesions affecting the supratentorial ventricular system — the transcortical and interhemispheric transcallosal approaches — there has been argument about the better of the two alternatives. The literature describes numerous approaches and variations on these two principles for any part of the third or lateral ventricles. Authors claim to have better results with their preferred approach, but a comparative study does not exist. Our own study is also purely descriptive and updates our recent experiences with the interhemispheric transcallosal approach.


Epidural Hematoma Neuropsychological Consequence Postoperative Deficit Subdural Hygroma Periventricular Lesion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Apuzzo MLJ, Oleg KC, Gott PS, Teng EL, Zee CS, Giannotta SL, Weiss MH (1982) Transcallosal, interfornicial approaches for lesions affecting the third ventricle: surgical considerations and consequences. Neurosurgery 10:547–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellotti C, Pappada G, Sani R, Oliven G, Stangalino C (1991) The transcallosal approach for lesions affecting the lateral and third ventricle: surgical considerations and results in a series of 42 cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 111:103–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benes V (1990) Advantages and disadvantages of the transcallosal approach to the III ventricle. Childs Nerv Syst 6:437–439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bush, E (1944) A new approach for the removal of tumors of the third ventricle. Acta Psychiatr Scand 19:57–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dandy WE (1922) Diagnosis, localization and removal of tumors of the third ventricle. Johns Hopkins Hosp Bull 33:188–189Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilsbach JA, Eggert HR, Hassler W (1985) Possibilities and limits of the midline interhemispheric approach. Acta Neurochir (Wien) [Suppl] 35:85–88Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nakasu Y, Isozumi T, Nioka H, Handa J (1991) Mechanisms of mutisms following the transcallosal approach to the ventricles. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 110:146–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oepen G, Schulz-Weiling R, Birg W, Straesser S, Gilsbach J (1988) Neuropsychological assessment of the transcallosal approach. Eur Arch Psychiatr Neurol Sci 237:365–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petrucci RJ, Bucheit WA, Woodruff GC, Karian JM, Defillipp GJ (1987) Transcallosal parafornicial approach for third ventricle tumors: neuropsychological consequences. Neurosurgery 20:457–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rhoton AL, Yamamoto I, Peace DA (1981) Microsurgery of the third ventricle, part 2. Operative approaches. Neurosurgery 8:357–373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Meyer
    • 1
  • K. Schaller
    • 2
  • V. Rohde
    • 2
  • W. E. Hassler
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity of BonnBonnGermany
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryKlinikum KalkwegDuisburgGermany

Personalised recommendations