Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol.  2008 Sep;1(3):148-153. 10.3342/ceo.2008.1.3.148.

Endoscopic Versus Traditional Craniofacial Resection for Patients with Sinonasal Tumors Involving the Anterior Skull Base

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. chulhee@snu.ac.kr
  • 2Department of Otolaryngology, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Jinju, Korea.
  • 3Department of Otolaryngology, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Korea.
  • 4Research Center for Sensory Organs, Medical Research Center, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract


OBJECTIVES
With the advent of microdebriders and image guidance systems, endoscope-assisted surgery is now more widely used for the treatment of tumors involving the base of the skull. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical features of tumors involving the anterior skull base and to evaluate the treatment outcomes according to the surgical approach, which included the traditional craniofacial resection (TCFR) and the endoscopic craniofacial resection with craniotomy (ECFR).
METHODS
Forty-six patients who underwent craniofacial resection from 1989 through 2006 at Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital were included in this study. Demographics, histology, surgical management, surgical outcomes, complications, and morbidity were analyzed.
RESULTS
The number of malignant and benign lesions was 40 and 6 cases respectively. The most common diagnosis was olfactory neuroblastoma occurring in 41% of the cases followed by squamous cell carcinoma and malignant melanoma. Thirty-six patients underwent TCFR, while ECFR was performed with or without adjunctive chemotherapy or radiotherapy in 10 patients. The overall five-year survival rate for patients with malignant tumors of the anterior skull base was 47.4%. Out of 19 patients with olfactory neuroblastomas, 10 patients had TCFR and six among them died of their disease. Nine patients underwent ECFR, and none of them died of their disease. The ECFR group had lower morbidity and cosmetic deformity than did the TCFR group.
CONCLUSION
The ECFR may be considered as an alternative option for the treatment of selected tumors with anterior skull base invasion. This approach offers the advantages of avoiding facial incisions with comparable treatment results.

Keyword

Nose neoplasms; Skull base; Endoscopic craniofacial resection

MeSH Terms

Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
Congenital Abnormalities
Cosmetics
Craniotomy
Demography
Esthesioneuroblastoma, Olfactory
Humans
Melanoma
Nose Neoplasms
Skull
Skull Base
Survival Rate
Cosmetics

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Comparison in morbidity between surgical approaches using the Mann-Whitney U test. ECFR group shows shortened hospital stay and operation time compared with TCFR group. ECFR: endoscopic craniofacial resection with craniotomy; TCFR: traditional craniofacial resection.


Reference

1. Buchmann L, Larsen C, Pollack A, Tawfik O, Sykes K, Hoover LA. Endoscopic techniques in resection of anterior skull base/paranasal sinus malignancies. Laryngoscope. 2006; 10. 116(10):1749–1754. PMID: 17003718.
Article
2. Ketcham AS, Wilkins RH, Van Buren JM, Smith RR. A combined intracranial facial approach to the paranasal sinuses. Am J Surg. 1963; 11. 106:698–703. PMID: 14078719.
Article
3. Kraus DH, Shah JP, Arbit E, Galicich JH, Strong EW. Complications of craniofacial resection for tumors involving the anterior skull base. Head Neck. 1994; Jul–Aug. 16(4):307–312. PMID: 8056574.
Article
4. Richtsmeier WJ, Briggs RJ, Koch WM, Eisele DW, Loury MC, Price JC, et al. Complications and early outcome of anterior craniofacial resection. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992; 9. 118(9):913–917. PMID: 1503715.
Article
5. Yuen AP, Fung CF, Hung KN. Endoscopic cranionasal resection of anterior skull base tumor. Am J Otolaryngol. 1997; Nov–Dec. 18(6):431–433. PMID: 9395024.
6. Thaler ER, Kotapka M, Lanza DC, Kennedy DW. Endoscopically assisted anterior cranial skull base resection of sinonasal tumors. Am J Rhinol. 1999; Jul–Aug. 13(4):303–310. PMID: 10485018.
Article
7. Devaiah AK, Larsen C, Tawfik O, O'Boynick P, Hoover LA. Esthesioneuroblastoma: endoscopic nasal and anterior craniotomy resection. Laryngoscope. 2003; 12. 113(12):2086–2090. PMID: 14660907.
Article
8. Castelnuovo PG, Belli E, Bignami M, Battaglia P, Sberze F, Tomei G. Endoscopic nasal and anterior craniotomy resection for malignant nasoethmoid tumors involving the anterior skull base. Skull Base. 2006; 2. 16(1):15–18. PMID: 16880896.
Article
9. Lund V, Howard DJ, Wei WI. Endoscopic resection of malignant tumors of the nose and sinuses. Am J Rhinol. 2007; Jan–Feb. 21(1):89–94. PMID: 17283568.
Article
10. Lee CH, Jung HW, Rhee CS, Park HJ, Hah JH, Min YG, et al. Anterior and middle skull base surgery: SNUH Experience. Korean J Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 1998; 2. 41(2):218–225.
11. Har-El G, Casiano RR. Endoscopic management of anterior skull base tumors. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2005; 2. 38(1):133–144. PMID: 15649504.
Article
12. Rhee CS, Won TB, Lee CH, Min YG, Sung MW, Kim KH, et al. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the sinonasal tract: treatment results. Laryngoscope. 2006; 6. 116(6):982–986. PMID: 16735899.
Article
13. Osguthorpe JD, Patel S. Craniofacial approaches to tumors of the anterior skull base. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001; 12. 34(6):1123–1142. PMID: 11728937.
14. Cheesman AD, Lund VJ, Howard DJ. Craniofacial resection for tumors of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Head Neck Surg. 1986; Jul–Aug. 8(6):429–435. PMID: 3721885.
Article
15. Shah JP, Sundaresan N, Galicich J, Strong EW. Craniofacial resections for tumors involving the base of the skull. Am J Surg. 1987; 10. 154(4):352–358. PMID: 3661836.
Article
16. Levine PA, Scher RL, Jane JA, Persing JA, Newman SA, Miller J, et al. The craniofacial resection-eleven-year experience at the University of Virginia: problems and solutions. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1989; 12. 101(6):665–669. PMID: 2512555.
Article
17. Lund VJ, Harrison DF. Craniofacial resection for tumors of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Am J Surg. 1988; 9. 156(3 Pt 1):187–190. PMID: 3421426.
Article
18. McCutcheon IE, Blacklock JB, Weber RS, DeMonte F, Moser RP, Byers M, et al. Anterior transcranial (craniofacial) resection of tumors of the paranasal sinuses: surgical technique and results. Neurosurgery. 1996; 3. 38(3):471–479. PMID: 8837798.
Article
19. Bockmühl U, Minovi A, Kratzsch B, Hendus J, Draf W. Endonasal micro-endoscopic tumor surgery: state of the art. Laryngorhinootologie. 2005; 12. 84(12):884–891. PMID: 16358197.
20. Roh HJ, Batra PS, Citardi MJ, Lee J, Bolger WE, Lanza DC. Endoscopic resection of sinonasal malignancies: a preliminary report. Am J Rhinol. 2004; Jul–Aug. 18(4):239–246. PMID: 15490571.
Article
21. Oskouian RJ Jr, Jane JA Sr, Dumont AS, Sheehan JM, Laurent JJ, Levine PA. Esthesioneuroblastoma: clinical presentation, radiological, and pathological features, treatment, review of the literature, and the University of Virginia experience. Neurosurg Focus. 2002; 5. 15. 12(5):e4. PMID: 16119902.
Article
22. Kim DW, Jo YH, Kim JH, Wu HG, Rhee CS, Lee CH, et al. Neoadjuvant etoposide, ifosfamide, and cisplatin for the treatment of olfactory neuroblastoma. Cancer. 2004; 11. 15. 101(10):2257–2260. PMID: 15484215.
Article
23. Simon JH, Zhen W, McCulloch TM, Hoffman HT, Paulino AC, Mayr NA, et al. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the University of Iowa experience 1978-1998. Laryngoscope. 2001; 3. 111(3):488–493. PMID: 11224781.
Article
24. Polin RS, Sheehan JP, Chenelle AG, Munoz E, Larner J, Phillips CD, et al. The role of preoperative adjuvant treatment in the management of esthesioneuroblastoma: the University of Virginia experience. Neurosurgery. 1998; 5. 42(5):1029–1037. PMID: 9588547.
Full Text Links
  • CEO
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr