Computer Modeled Multiportal Approaches to the Skull Base

Randall A. Bly; David Su; Blake Hannaford; Manuel Ferreira  Jr.; Kris S. Moe

doi:10.1055/s-0032-1329623

Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base, Table of Contents

J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2012; 73(06): 415-423
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1329623

Original Article

Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Computer Modeled Multiportal Approaches to the Skull Base

Authors

Randall A. Bly

¹Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, United States
David Su

²Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States
Blake Hannaford

³Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Washington, BioRobotics Laboratory, Office of Sponsored Programs, Seattle, Washington, United States
Manuel Ferreira Jr.

²Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States
Kris S. Moe

¹Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, United States

Abstract

Skull base surgical approaches have evolved significantly to minimize collateral tissue damage and improve access to complex anatomic regions. Many endoscopic surgical portals have been described, and these can be combined in multiportal approaches that permit improved angles for visualization and instrumentation. To assist in the choice of entry portal and surgical pathway analysis, a three-dimensional computer model with virtual endoscopy was created. The model was evaluated on transnasal and transorbital approaches to access 11 specified sellar and parasellar target locations on 14 computed tomography (CT) scans. Data were collected on length of approach, angle between instruments, and approach angle with respect to anatomical planes. Optimal multiportal approach combinations were derived. The data demonstrated that the shortest, most direct pathway to many sellar and parasellar targets was through transorbital portals. Distances were reduced by 35% for certain target locations; combining transorbital and transnasal portals increased the angle between instruments 4-fold for many targets. The predicted values from the model were validated on four cadaver specimens. Computer modeling holds the potential to play an integral role in the design, analysis, and testing of new surgical approaches, as well as in the selection of optimal approach strategies for the unique pathology of individual patients.

Keywords

computer model - pituitary - sella - anterior skull base - approach planning - virtual endoscopy - multiportal

Full Text

References

References
1 Kassam AB, Prevedello DM, Carrau RL , et al. The front door to meckel's cave: an anteromedial corridor via expanded endoscopic endonasal approach- technical considerations and clinical series. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (3, Suppl) ons71-ons82 , discussion ons82–ons83
2 Zada G, Du R, Laws Jr ER. Defining the “edge of the envelope”: patient selection in treating complex sellar-based neoplasms via transsphenoidal versus open craniotomy. J Neurosurg 2011; 114: 286-300
3 Romano A, Chibbaro S, Marsella M , et al. Combined endoscopic transsphenoidal-transventricular approach for resection of a giant pituitary macroadenoma. World Neurosurg 2010; 74: 161-164
4 Alleyne Jr CH, Barrow DL, Oyesiku NM. Combined transsphenoidal and pterional craniotomy approach to giant pituitary tumors. Surg Neurol 2002; 57: 380-390 , discussion 390
5 Greenfield JP, Leng LZ, Chaudhry U , et al. Combined simultaneous endoscopic transsphenoidal and endoscopic transventricular resection of a giant pituitary macroadenoma. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2008; 51: 306-309
6 Ojha BK, Husain M, Rastogi M, Chandra A, Chugh A, Husain N. Combined trans-sphenoidal and simultaneous trans-ventricular-endoscopic decompression of a giant pituitary adenoma: case report. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2009; 151: 843-847 , discussion 847
7 de Notaris M, Prats-Galino A, Cavallo LM , et al. Preliminary experience with a new three-dimensional computer-based model for the study and the analysis of skull base approaches. Childs Nerv Syst 2010; 26: 621-626
8 de Notaris M, Solari D, Cavallo LM , et al. The use of a three-dimensional novel computer-based model for analysis of the endonasal endoscopic approach to the midline skull base. World Neurosurg 2011; 75: 106-113 , discussion 36–40
9 Bernardo A, Preul MC, Zabramski JM, Spetzler RF. A three-dimensional interactive virtual dissection model to simulate transpetrous surgical avenues. Neurosurgery 2003; 52: 499-505 , discussion 504–505
10 Kakizawa Y, Hongo K, Rhoton Jr AL. Construction of a three-dimensional interactive model of the skull base and cranial nerves. Neurosurgery 2007; 60: 901-910 , discussion 901–910
11 Tolsdorff B, Pommert A, Höhne KH , et al. Virtual reality: a new paranasal sinus surgery simulator. Laryngoscope 2010; 120: 420-426
12 Prosser JD, Figueroa R, Carrau RI, Ong YK, Solares CA. Quantitative analysis of endoscopic endonasal approaches to the infratemporal fossa. Laryngoscope 2011; 121: 1601-1605
13 Qiu TM, Zhang Y, Wu JS , et al. Virtual reality presurgical planning for cerebral gliomas adjacent to motor pathways in an integrated 3-D stereoscopic visualization of structural MRI and DTI tractography. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2010; 152: 1847-1857
14 Filipce V, Pillai P, Makiese O, Zarzour H, Pigott M, Ammirati M. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the working area obtained by endoscope and microscope in various approaches to the anterior communicating artery complex using computed tomography-based frameless stereotaxy: a cadaver study. Neurosurgery 2009; 65: 1147-1152 , discussion 1152–1153
15 Beretta F, Andaluz N, Chalaala C, Bernucci C, Salud L, Zuccarello M. Image-guided anatomical and morphometric study of supraorbital and transorbital minicraniotomies to the sellar and perisellar regions: comparison with standard techniques. J Neurosurg 2010; 113: 975-981
16 Cavalcanti DD, García-González U, Agrawal A , et al. Quantitative anatomic study of the transciliary supraorbital approach: benefits of additional orbital osteotomy?. Neurosurgery 2010; 66 (6, Suppl Operative) 205-210
17 Moe KS, Bergeron CM, Ellenbogen RG. Transorbital neuroendoscopic surgery. Neurosurgery 2010; 67 (3, Suppl Operative) ONS16-ONS28
18 Balakrishnan K, Moe KS. Applications and outcomes of orbital and transorbital endoscopic surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011; 144: 815-820
19 Ciporen JN, Moe KS, Ramanathan D , et al. Multiportal endoscopic approaches to the central skull base: a cadaveric study. World Neurosurg 2010; 73: 705-712
20 Woerdeman PA, Willems PW, Noordmans HJ, van der Sprenkel JW. The analysis of intraoperative neurosurgical instrument movement using a navigation log-file. Int J Med Robot 2006; 2: 139-145
21 Ogata M, Nagasaka M, Inuiya T, Makiyama K, Kubota Y. A development of surgical simulator for training of operative skills using patient-specific data. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011; 163: 415-421
22 Bauernschmitt R, Feuerstein M, Traub J, Schirmbeck EU, Klinker G, Lange R. Optimal port placement and enhanced guidance in robotically assisted cardiac surgery. Surg Endosc 2007; 21: 684-687
23 McCool RR, Warren FM, Wiggins III RH, Hunt JP. Robotic surgery of the infratemporal fossa utilizing novel suprahyoid port. Laryngoscope 2010; 120: 1738-1743
24 O'Malley Jr BW, Weinstein GS. Robotic anterior and midline skull base surgery: preclinical investigations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69 (2, Suppl) S125-S128
25 Lee JY, O'Malley Jr BW, Newman JG , et al. Transoral robotic surgery of the skull base: a cadaver and feasibility study. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2010; 72: 181-187
26 Kupferman M, Demonte F, Holsinger FC, Hanna E. Transantral robotic access to the pituitary gland. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009; 141: 413-415