» Articles » PMID: 31316882

Supratentorial and Infratentorial Approaches to Pineal Surgery: A Database Analysis

Overview
Publisher Thieme
Date 2019 Jul 19
PMID 31316882
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

 Neoplasms involving the pineal gland are rare. When they do occur, tumor resection is anatomically challenging and is traditionally addressed by either a supratentorial or an infratentorial approach. To date, no large, multicenter studies have been performed that systematically analyze outcomes comparing these two approaches. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes for patients undergoing pineal neoplasm resection, comparing supratentorial and infratentorial approaches.  Retrospective database review.  Multi-institutional database.  From 2005 to 2016, 60 patients were identified, with 13 undergoing a supratentorial approach and 47 undergoing an infratentorial approach.  Patient demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day postoperative outcomes were investigated using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Demographics, readmission, reoperation, and complication rates were analyzed and compared with previous studies.  Patient demographics were similar between these two groups. The overall complication rates for the supratentorial and infratentorial approaches were 30.8 and 17%, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant. The most common medical complications encountered were respiratory and hematological.  As the first multi-institutional database analysis of approaches to the pineal gland, this study provides an analysis of patient demographics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications. After controlling for preoperative risk factors and demographic characteristics, no statistically significant differences in postoperative outcomes were found between infratentorial and supratentorial approaches. The mean readmission, reoperation, and complication rates were found to be 2.1, 8.3, and 20%, respectively. The lack of significant difference between approaches suggests that clinical decision-making should depend upon anatomical considerations and physician preference, although the complications illustrated here may provide some preoperative guidance.

Citing Articles

Thirty-day morbidity and mortality following primary total elbow arthroplasty in octogenarians.

Gupta P, Quan T, Manzi J, Zimmer Z Shoulder Elbow. 2022; 14(5):562-567.

PMID: 36199508 PMC: 9527482. DOI: 10.1177/17585732221077668.


Evaluation of the Perioperative and Postoperative Course of Surgery for Pineal Germinoma in the SIOP CNS GCT 96 Trial.

Shabo E, Czech T, Nicholson J, Mallucci C, Mottolese C, Piatelli G Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(14).

PMID: 35884617 PMC: 9323477. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14143555.

References
1.
Chen L, Mao Y . Consensuses and controversies on pineal tumor surgery. World Neurosurg. 2011; 74(4-5):446-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2010.10.033. View

2.
Little K, Friedman A, Fukushima T . Surgical approaches to pineal region tumors. J Neurooncol. 2002; 54(3):287-99. DOI: 10.1023/a:1012766902431. View

3.
Bhimani A, Esfahani D, Denyer S, Chiu R, Rosenberg D, Barks A . Adult Chiari I Malformations: An Analysis of Surgical Risk Factors and Complications Using an International Database. World Neurosurg. 2018; 115:e490-e500. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.04.077. View

4.
Yamamoto I, Kageyama N . Microsurgical anatomy of the pineal region. J Neurosurg. 1980; 53(2):205-21. DOI: 10.3171/jns.1980.53.2.0205. View

5.
Bruce J, STEIN B . Surgical management of pineal region tumors. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1995; 134(3-4):130-5. DOI: 10.1007/BF01417679. View