MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3171/2019.10.focus19728

Медицинская библиотека · Neurosurgical focus · 2020

Endoscopic endonasal surgery outcomes for pediatric craniopharyngioma: a systematic review.

Soldozy Sauson, Yeghyayan Michelle, Yağmurlu Kaan, Norat Pedro, Taylor Davis G, Kalani M Yashar S, Jane John A, Syed Hasan R

СтатьяСистематический обзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to systematically review the outcomes of endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) for pediatric craniopharyngiomas so as to assess its safety and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases for studies published between 1986 and 2019. All studies assessing outcomes following EES for pediatric craniopharyngiomas were included.

RESULTS

Of the total 48 articles identified in the original literature search, 13 studies were ultimately selected. This includes comparative studies with other surgical approaches, retrospective cohort studies, and case series.

CONCLUSIONS

EES for pediatric craniopharyngiomas is a safe and efficacious alternative to other surgical approaches. Achieving gross-total resection with minimal complications is feasible with EES and is comparable, if not superior in some cases, to traditional means of resection. Ideally, a randomized controlled trial might be implemented in the future to further elucidate the effectiveness of EES for resection of craniopharyngiomas.

Для цитирования: Soldozy Sauson, Yeghyayan Michelle, Yağmurlu Kaan, Norat Pedro, Taylor Davis G, Kalani M Yashar S, Jane John A, Syed Hasan R. Endoscopic endonasal surgery outcomes for pediatric craniopharyngioma: a systematic review.. Neurosurgical focus. 2020. DOI: 10.3171/2019.10.focus19728.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.