Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byKathleen Wilmott Modified over 10 years ago
1
Endoscopic and Combined Approaches Ruth E. Bristol, MD Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery
2
Acknowledgements Maggie Bobrowitz, RN, MBA HH team Harold Rekate, MD Adib Abla, MD Patients and Families
3
Outline How do we choose the right surgery? What does “endoscopic” mean? How an endoscope works Choosing the endoscopic approach Risks What does “combined” mean? Why we choose a combined approach
4
How Do We Get There? Blow up of lesion
5
Patient Selection Type II, III, and IV: Endoscopic + Type III and IV: Combined
6
What Is An Endoscope? Camera Working end
7
Risks of Treatment Memory loss Hypothalamic injury Increased appetite Diabetes inispidus Other hormonal abnormalities Vascular injuries (stroke) Cranial nerve
8
Case 1
9
Endoscopic Video
10
Post-op: Resection Cavity
11
Endoscopy Endoscope approaching lesion from side contralateral to attachment. Micromanipulator on the endoscope, and stereotactic guidance frame.
12
Terms Contralateral Ipsilateral
13
Endoscopic Pros Comparable seizure control (49% vs 54%) Shorter length of stays (4.1 vs 7.7 days) Cons Short term memory loss Less working room (bad for large lesions) Thalamic infarct reported (~85 % asymptomatic)
14
Endoscopic Background
15
Surgery From Above Endoscopic series 37 patients with refractory seizures Mean age of onset approx 10 months of age 62 % with IQ < 70 Always a contralateral approach Ng, Rekate et al. Neurology 2008
16
Open Vs. Endoscopic Percent of disconnect/resection Not statistically tied to seizure-free rate 100% resection gave 100% seizure-free postop course in 8 of 12 Compared to open approach Endoscopic: Shorter stay: 4.5 versus 7.7 days Comparable seizure-free rates: 49 % vs. 54 % (endo vs. TC) Tumors smaller in endoscopic: 1.01 vs 2.43 cc (p=0.0322) Reasons to favor open approach Larger tumors (>1.5 cm) with bilateral attachments Better for children younger than adolescent age
17
Seizure Control Abla et al., AANS Philadelphia. May 3, 2010
18
Case 2 7 yo female Gelastic epilepsy Behavioral problems (impulsivity) Rapid progression of seizures in summer
19
Case 2 Post op
20
Case 3 20 months old Multiple medical problems Gelastic epilepsy
21
Case 3 Post op
22
Endoscopic Approach
23
Combined Approach
24
Combined Video
25
Combined Approach
26
Outcome Seizure freedom: 29-49% Seizure Reduction: 55-73% In older patients, higher IQ correlated with better chance of seizure freedom Memory loss 8% permanent Adults had more complications than children
27
Complications Postoperative DI Usually transient (< 1 week). DDAVP given in ICU Weight gain (satiety center = VMH) 19% Short-term memory loss Transient 58 % in TC group / 14 % in endoscopic group (< 2 wks) Permanent ~ 8 % in both (2/26 and 3/37) Ng, Rekate et al. Epilepsia 2006
28
SMALLLARGE Type IOZ Gamma Knife (stable) Type IIEndoscopicTranscallosal Gamma Knife (bilateral, clinically stable) Type IIIEndoscopic +/- OZ--- Gamma Knife (stable) Type IV ---Staged : target main component 1 st BNI Treatment Paradigm Laser?
29
Conclusions PROPER SELECTION No single approach is appropriate or advantageous for all patients Decisions individualized Surgical anatomy Presence of acute clinical deterioration
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.