METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the use of FloSeal with a hemostatic delivery system in transnasal endoscopic and microscopic skull base procedures performed at the authors' institution from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2015. In all cases the number of aliquots was noted for the entire operation, and the total number of FloSeal ampules of 5 mL was also recorded.
RESULTS: Our device allowed controlled application of small amounts (0.5-1 mL) of FloSeal to the site of bleeding. This controlled application resulted not only in increased visibility during its application, but it also reduced the amount of FloSeal required during the procedure. We were able to use 5-10 applications per 5-mL ampule of FloSeal within an individual procedure. No procedure required more than one 5-mL ampule of FloSeal. Therefore, the use of our device results in a reduction of costs. Prior to the use of our device, we were often only able to use 1 vial of 5 ml of material for 1 or 2 applications, especially in transnasal endoscopic procedures when working along a deep corridor.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that our delivery device of FlowSeal can effectively control hemostasis by applying small amounts of FlowSeal to the site of bleeding. This results in increased visibility during hemostasis and a reduction of cost.
METHODS: Miri General Hospital is a remote center in Sarawak, Malaysia, serving a population with difficult access to neurosurgical services. Two neurosurgeons were stationed here on a rotational basis every fortnight during the pandemic to handle neurosurgical cases. Patients were triaged depending on their urgent needs for surgery or transfer to a neurosurgical center and managed accordingly. All patients were screened for potential risk of contracting COVID-19 prior to the surgery. Based on this, the level of personal protective equipment required for the health care workers involved was determined.
RESULTS: During the initial 6 weeks of the Movement Control Order in Malaysia, there were 50 urgent neurosurgical consultations. Twenty patients (40%) required emergency surgery or intervention. There were 9 vascular (45%), 5 trauma (25%), 4 tumor (20%), and 2 hydrocephalus cases (10%). Eighteen patients were operated at Miri General Hospital, among whom 17 (94.4%) survived. Ninety percent of anticipated transfers were avoided. None of the medical staff acquired COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS: This framework allowed timely intervention for neurosurgical emergencies (within a safe limit), minimized transfer, and enabled uninterrupted neurosurgical services at a remote center with difficult access to neurosurgical care during a pandemic.
METHODS: The preoperative MRI of a 54-year-old woman revealed a sellar lesion (28 × 19 × 16 mm), presumably a pituitary macroadenoma, and a second extra-axial lesion (22 × 36 × 20 mm) expanding from the tuberculum sellae to the planum sphenoidale with encasement of the anterior communicating complex, presumably a meningioma. We used intraoperative MRI to assess the extent of the resection before reconstructing the large skull base defect. Furthermore, we systematically reviewed pertinent articles retrieved by a PubMed/Embase database search between 1961 and December 2018.
RESULTS: Out of 63 patients with synchronous tumors reported in 43 publications, we found 3 patients in which the tumor was removed by EEA. In these 3 patients and the presented case, the resection of both lesions was successful, without major approach-related morbidity or mortality. More extensive removal of endonasal structures to gain an adequate tumor exposure was not necessary. We did not find any previous reports describing the benefits of intraoperative MRI in the presented setting.
CONCLUSIONS: In the rare case of a synchronous meningioma and pituitary adenoma of the sellar region, intraoperative MRI might be beneficial in confirming residual disease before skull base reconstruction, and therefore radiologic follow-up.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the risk of infections after primary cranioplasty in adult patients who underwent craniectomies for non-infection-related indications are no different when performed early or delayed. We tested this hypothesis in a prospective, multicenter, cohort study.
METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from 5 neurosurgical centers in the United Kingdom, Malaysia, Singapore, and Bangladesh. Only patients older than 16 years from the time of the non-infection-related craniectomy were included. The recruitment period was over 17 months, and postoperative follow-up was at least 6 months. Patient baseline characteristics, rate of infections, and incidence of hydrocephalus were collected.
RESULTS: Seventy patients were included in this study. There were 25 patients in the early cranioplasty cohort (cranioplasty performed before 12 weeks) and 45 patients in the late cranioplasty cohort (cranioplasty performed after 12 weeks). The follow-up period ranged between 16 and 34 months (mean, 23 months). Baseline characteristics were largely similar but differed only in prophylactic antibiotics received (P = 0.28), and primary surgeon performing cranioplasty (P = 0.15). There were no infections in the early cranioplasty cohort, whereas 3 infections were recorded in the late cohort. This did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.55).
CONCLUSIONS: Early cranioplasty in non-infection-related craniectomy is relatively safe. There does not appear to be an added advantage to delaying cranioplasties more than 12 weeks after the initial craniectomy in terms of infection reduction. There was no significant difference in infection rates or risk of hydrocephalus between the early and late cohorts.
METHODS: This was a nonrandomized, prospective observational study conducted from September 2011 to January 2015 on patients with intracranial convexity and parasagittal meningiomas. Preoperative computed tomography brain scans were obtained in all patients to confirm bony hyperostosis. Intraoperatively, part of the hyperostotic bone was sent for histopathologic examination. The rest of the bone flap was refashioned by drilling off the hyperostotic part. The bone flap was put back over the craniotomy site after soaking in distilled water. All patients were followed up for tumor recurrence.
RESULTS: The study included 34 patients with convexity or parasagittal meningioma World Health Organization grade I-II who underwent Simpson grade Ia and IIa excision. Median follow-up was 63.5 months (mean 64.9 ± 9.4 months). The hyperostotic bone flap showed presence of tumor in 35% of patients. There were 2 patients with parasagittal meningiomas after Simpson grade IIa resections who developed tumor recurrences.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that meningioma recurrence was unlikely when autologous cranioplasty was done with refashioned hyperostotic bone. This could be done in the same setting with meningioma excision. There was no recurrence in convexity meningiomas at mean 5-year follow-up.