Outcomes of endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal surgery on non‐functioning pituitary adenomas: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Outcomes of endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal surgery on non‐functioning pituitary... Both microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery are effective approaches for nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. The issue on the comparison of their efficacy and safety remains inconsistent. A thorough search of the literatures (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) were performed up to March 2017. Studies reporting outcomes of microscopic or endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery on nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas were included. A meta‐analysis was performed focusing on the early stage and long term outcomes. The final search yielded 19 eligible studies enrolling 3847 patients, 389 of them underwent microscopic approach and 3458 of them with endoscopic approach. As to the early stage outcomes, the rate of gross tumor resection was significantly higher in the endoscopic group than that in microscopic group (73% versus 60%, P < 0.001). Meanwhile, endoscopic approach showed priority over microscopy on postoperative hypopituitarism (63% versus 65%, P < 0.001) and CSF leakage (3% versus 7%, P < 0.001). For the long term outcomes, the rate of visual improvement was significant higher in the endoscopic group than that in microscopic group (77% versus 50%, P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the groups regarding the rate of permanent diabetic insipidus and meningitis. The endoscopic approach may be associated with higher rate of gross tumor movement and lower risk of postoperatively complications for treating nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma, when compared with microscopic approach. However, the confidence was shorted due to limited high quality evidence (largely randomized and controlled studies). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine Wiley

Outcomes of endoscopic and microscopic transsphenoidal surgery on non‐functioning pituitary adenomas: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/outcomes-of-endoscopic-and-microscopic-transsphenoidal-surgery-on-non-i768OV959j
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Foundation for Cellular and Molecular Medicine
ISSN
1582-1838
eISSN
1582-4934
D.O.I.
10.1111/jcmm.13445
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Both microscopic and endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery are effective approaches for nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. The issue on the comparison of their efficacy and safety remains inconsistent. A thorough search of the literatures (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) were performed up to March 2017. Studies reporting outcomes of microscopic or endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery on nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas were included. A meta‐analysis was performed focusing on the early stage and long term outcomes. The final search yielded 19 eligible studies enrolling 3847 patients, 389 of them underwent microscopic approach and 3458 of them with endoscopic approach. As to the early stage outcomes, the rate of gross tumor resection was significantly higher in the endoscopic group than that in microscopic group (73% versus 60%, P < 0.001). Meanwhile, endoscopic approach showed priority over microscopy on postoperative hypopituitarism (63% versus 65%, P < 0.001) and CSF leakage (3% versus 7%, P < 0.001). For the long term outcomes, the rate of visual improvement was significant higher in the endoscopic group than that in microscopic group (77% versus 50%, P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the groups regarding the rate of permanent diabetic insipidus and meningitis. The endoscopic approach may be associated with higher rate of gross tumor movement and lower risk of postoperatively complications for treating nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma, when compared with microscopic approach. However, the confidence was shorted due to limited high quality evidence (largely randomized and controlled studies).

Journal

Journal of Cellular and Molecular MedicineWiley

Published: Jan 1, 2018

Keywords: ; ; ; ;

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off