English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background and Aim: EETA (Endoscopic Endonasal Transsphenoidal Approach) is a preferred choice for pituitary tumors. EETA offers minimal invasiveness, fewer complications, and better outcomes than the sublabial or transseptal microscopic approach. EETA has three approaches: mononostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, binostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approach, and one and a half nostril approach. This study aims to compare three different EETAs and compare between microscopic transsphenoidal approach, transcranial approach and EETA. Methods and Materials/Patients: To provide up-to-date information, we concisely reviewed these three EETAs. Using the keywords of “neuroendoscopy”, “META” (Mononostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “OETA” (One and a half nostril Approach), “BETA” (Binostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach), “pituitary adenoma”, “EETA”, “endoscopy”, “transsphenoidal approach”, “transcranial approach for pituitary adenoma” and “microscopic transsphenoidal approach”. We retrieved all the relevant articles from Google Scholar, PubMed, and Medline. Then, we reviewed them and critically analyzed them. Results: In BETA there is free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field and a broader view of the sphenoid sinus and it is an excellent approach to resect large tumors. The META is suitable in tumors with limited involvement of the intra-sellar and supra-sellar area. The mononostril approach is not suitable and has some limitations for the following situations: a crowded narrow nasal cavity, a harder tumor with the invasive appearance or significant suprasellar extension, and lesions other than pituitary adenomas. The OETA provides a sufficient surgical corridor for a 2-surgeon/4 or 3-hands technique with a minimal injury of the nose and good operative results, free and easy movement of surgical instruments in the surgical field, low post-operative morbidity, and good post-operative quality of life. Conclusion: In EETA, knowing the size and consistency of tumor, general versus invasive pituitary adenoma, and the extent of parasellar and suprasellar extension, is essential. If we cannot reach a pituitary macroadenoma with a trans-sphenoidal approach, then we can use a transcranial approach for the removal of the tumor. The microscopic transsphenoidal approach is suitable for pediatric pituitary adenoma

Comparing Mononostril, Binostril, and One and a Half Nostril Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Approach for Treating Pituitary AdenomaPituitary Adenoma