Supraorbital vs Endo-Orbital Routes to the Lateral Skull Base: A Quantitative and Qualitative Anatomic Study.

BACKGROUND

Various extensions of the supraorbital approach reach the lateral and parasellar middle cranial fossa regions by removing the orbital rim and greater/lesser sphenoid wings. Recent proposals of a purely endoscopic ventral transorbital pathway to these regions heighten the need to compare these surgical windows.

OBJECTIVE

To detail the lateral and parasellar middle cranial fossa regions and quantify exposures by 2 surgical windows (transcranial and transorbital) through anatomic study.

METHODS

In 5 cadaveric specimens (10 sides), dissections consisted of 3 stages: stage 1 began with the supraorbital approach via the eyebrow; stage 2, endo-orbital approach via the superior eyelid, continued with removal of lesser and greater sphenoid wings; and stage 3, extended supraorbital, re-evaluated the gains of stage 2 from the perspective of stage 1. Operative working areas were quantified in Sylvian, anterolateral temporal, and parasellar regions; bone removal volumes were measured at each stage (nonpaired Student t-test).

RESULTS

Visualization into the anterolateral temporal and Sylvian areas, though varied in perspective, were comparable with either eyelid or transcranial routes. Compared with transcranial views through a supraorbital window, the eyelid approach significantly increased exposure in the parasellar region with wider angle of attack (P < .01) and achieved comparable bone removal volumes.

CONCLUSION

Stage 2's unique anatomic view of the lateral and parasellar middle cranial fossa regions paves the way for possible surgical application to select pathologies typically treated via transcranial approaches. Disadvantages may be the surgeon's unfamiliarity with the anatomy of this purely endoscopic, ventral route and difficulties of dural and orbital repair.