2018 Section 5 - Rhinology and Allergic Disorders

IV.

Skull Base A. Tumor Outcomes i.

Open vs. endoscopic Meccariello G, Deganello A, Choussy O, et al. Endoscopic nasal versus open approach for the management of sinonasal adenocarcinoma: a pooled-analysis of 1826 patients. Head Neck . 2016; 38 Suppl 1:E2267-E2274. EBM level 3a.................................................................................................241-248 Summary : This paper presents a systematic review of 39 articles comprising 1826 patients who underwent endoscopic versus open surgery for sinonasal adenocarcinoma. The endoscopic approach was associated with lower rates of complication and local failure and improved overall survival, when taking all patients into consideration without controlling for tumor stage. Mortuaire G, Leroy X, Vandenhende-Szymanski C, et al. Comparison of endoscopic and external resections for sinonasal intestinal-type adenocarcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol . 2016; 273(12):4343-4350. EBM level 4.......................................................................................................249-256 Summary : This is a single-institution, retrospective series of 43 patients with intestinal-type adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinus who underwent open versus endoscopic resection. Overall, the T- stage was similar between groups. The disease-free survival was not different between groups out to a follow-up of 6.6 years. Moussazadeh N, Prabhu V, Bander ED, et al. Endoscopic endonasal versus open transcranial resection of craniopharyngiomas: a case-matched single-institution analysis. Neurosurg Focus . 2016; 41(6):E7. EBM level 4...................................................................................................................................................257-263 Summary : This is a single-institution retrospective series of 26 cases of midline craniopharyngioma treated with endoscopic versus open transcranial approach. Among cases deemed possible to achieve a gross total resection (GTR), the endoscopic approach provided improved rates of GTR and fewer complications. Lumbar drains vs. no drains Ahmed OH, Marcus S, Tauber JR, et al. Efficacy of perioperative lumbar drainage following endonasal endoscopic cerebrospinal fluid leak repair. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 2017; 156(1):52-60. EBM level 3a.................................................................................................................................................264-272 Summary : This article presents a systematic review of literature regarding lumbar drain (LD) use. Ultimately, 12 articles comprising 508 cases met inclusion criteria. The use of LD was not associated with a statistically significant lower rate of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak. The authors conclude that more studies are necessary.

ii.