What is the best route to the Meckel cave? Anatomical comparison between the endoscopic endonasal approach and a lateral approach

Jason Van Rompaey, Carrie Bush, Eyad Khabbaz, John R Vender, Ben Panizza, Clementino Arturo Solares

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Traditionally, a pterional approach is utilized to access the Meckel cave. Depending on the tumor location, extradural dissection of the Gasserian ganglion can be performed. An endoscopic endonasal access could potentially avoid a craniotomy in these cases. Methods: We performed an endoscopic endonasal approach as well as a lateral approach to the Meckel cave on six anatomic specimens. To access the Meckel cave endoscopically, a complete sphenoethmoidectomy and maxillary antrostomy followed by a transpterygoid approach was performed. For lateral access, a pterional craniotomy with extradural dissection was performed. Results: The endoscopic endonasal approach allowed adequate access to the Gasserian ganglion. All the relevant anatomy was identified without difficulty. Both approaches allowed for a similar exposure, but the endonasal approach avoided brain retraction and improved anteromedial exposure of the Gasserian ganglion. The lateral approach provided improved access posterolaterally and to the superior portion. Conclusion: The endoscopic endonasal approach to the Meckel cave is anatomically feasible. The morbidity associated with brain retraction from the open approaches can be avoided. Further understanding of the endoscopic anatomy within this region can facilitate continued advancement in endoscopic endonasal surgery and improvement in the safety and efficacy of these procedures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)331-336
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base
Volume74
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2 2013

Fingerprint

Trigeminal Ganglion
Craniotomy
Dissection
Anatomy
Brain
Morbidity
Safety
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Gasserian ganglion
  • Meckel cave
  • endonasal endoscopic
  • lateral approach
  • maxillary antrostomy
  • pterional craniotomy
  • sphenoethmoidectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

What is the best route to the Meckel cave? Anatomical comparison between the endoscopic endonasal approach and a lateral approach. / Van Rompaey, Jason; Bush, Carrie; Khabbaz, Eyad; Vender, John R; Panizza, Ben; Solares, Clementino Arturo.

In: Journal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base, Vol. 74, No. 6, 02.12.2013, p. 331-336.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Rompaey, Jason ; Bush, Carrie ; Khabbaz, Eyad ; Vender, John R ; Panizza, Ben ; Solares, Clementino Arturo. / What is the best route to the Meckel cave? Anatomical comparison between the endoscopic endonasal approach and a lateral approach. In: Journal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base. 2013 ; Vol. 74, No. 6. pp. 331-336.
@article{f60d8fc9dbe14e6aa24a4f082e025451,
title = "What is the best route to the Meckel cave? Anatomical comparison between the endoscopic endonasal approach and a lateral approach",
abstract = "Background: Traditionally, a pterional approach is utilized to access the Meckel cave. Depending on the tumor location, extradural dissection of the Gasserian ganglion can be performed. An endoscopic endonasal access could potentially avoid a craniotomy in these cases. Methods: We performed an endoscopic endonasal approach as well as a lateral approach to the Meckel cave on six anatomic specimens. To access the Meckel cave endoscopically, a complete sphenoethmoidectomy and maxillary antrostomy followed by a transpterygoid approach was performed. For lateral access, a pterional craniotomy with extradural dissection was performed. Results: The endoscopic endonasal approach allowed adequate access to the Gasserian ganglion. All the relevant anatomy was identified without difficulty. Both approaches allowed for a similar exposure, but the endonasal approach avoided brain retraction and improved anteromedial exposure of the Gasserian ganglion. The lateral approach provided improved access posterolaterally and to the superior portion. Conclusion: The endoscopic endonasal approach to the Meckel cave is anatomically feasible. The morbidity associated with brain retraction from the open approaches can be avoided. Further understanding of the endoscopic anatomy within this region can facilitate continued advancement in endoscopic endonasal surgery and improvement in the safety and efficacy of these procedures.",
keywords = "Gasserian ganglion, Meckel cave, endonasal endoscopic, lateral approach, maxillary antrostomy, pterional craniotomy, sphenoethmoidectomy",
author = "{Van Rompaey}, Jason and Carrie Bush and Eyad Khabbaz and Vender, {John R} and Ben Panizza and Solares, {Clementino Arturo}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1055/s-0033-1342989",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "74",
pages = "331--336",
journal = "Journal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base",
issn = "2193-6331",
publisher = "Thieme Medical Publishers",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What is the best route to the Meckel cave? Anatomical comparison between the endoscopic endonasal approach and a lateral approach

AU - Van Rompaey, Jason

AU - Bush, Carrie

AU - Khabbaz, Eyad

AU - Vender, John R

AU - Panizza, Ben

AU - Solares, Clementino Arturo

PY - 2013/12/2

Y1 - 2013/12/2

N2 - Background: Traditionally, a pterional approach is utilized to access the Meckel cave. Depending on the tumor location, extradural dissection of the Gasserian ganglion can be performed. An endoscopic endonasal access could potentially avoid a craniotomy in these cases. Methods: We performed an endoscopic endonasal approach as well as a lateral approach to the Meckel cave on six anatomic specimens. To access the Meckel cave endoscopically, a complete sphenoethmoidectomy and maxillary antrostomy followed by a transpterygoid approach was performed. For lateral access, a pterional craniotomy with extradural dissection was performed. Results: The endoscopic endonasal approach allowed adequate access to the Gasserian ganglion. All the relevant anatomy was identified without difficulty. Both approaches allowed for a similar exposure, but the endonasal approach avoided brain retraction and improved anteromedial exposure of the Gasserian ganglion. The lateral approach provided improved access posterolaterally and to the superior portion. Conclusion: The endoscopic endonasal approach to the Meckel cave is anatomically feasible. The morbidity associated with brain retraction from the open approaches can be avoided. Further understanding of the endoscopic anatomy within this region can facilitate continued advancement in endoscopic endonasal surgery and improvement in the safety and efficacy of these procedures.

AB - Background: Traditionally, a pterional approach is utilized to access the Meckel cave. Depending on the tumor location, extradural dissection of the Gasserian ganglion can be performed. An endoscopic endonasal access could potentially avoid a craniotomy in these cases. Methods: We performed an endoscopic endonasal approach as well as a lateral approach to the Meckel cave on six anatomic specimens. To access the Meckel cave endoscopically, a complete sphenoethmoidectomy and maxillary antrostomy followed by a transpterygoid approach was performed. For lateral access, a pterional craniotomy with extradural dissection was performed. Results: The endoscopic endonasal approach allowed adequate access to the Gasserian ganglion. All the relevant anatomy was identified without difficulty. Both approaches allowed for a similar exposure, but the endonasal approach avoided brain retraction and improved anteromedial exposure of the Gasserian ganglion. The lateral approach provided improved access posterolaterally and to the superior portion. Conclusion: The endoscopic endonasal approach to the Meckel cave is anatomically feasible. The morbidity associated with brain retraction from the open approaches can be avoided. Further understanding of the endoscopic anatomy within this region can facilitate continued advancement in endoscopic endonasal surgery and improvement in the safety and efficacy of these procedures.

KW - Gasserian ganglion

KW - Meckel cave

KW - endonasal endoscopic

KW - lateral approach

KW - maxillary antrostomy

KW - pterional craniotomy

KW - sphenoethmoidectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84888317273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84888317273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1055/s-0033-1342989

DO - 10.1055/s-0033-1342989

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84888317273

VL - 74

SP - 331

EP - 336

JO - Journal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base

JF - Journal of Neurological Surgery, Part B: Skull Base

SN - 2193-6331

IS - 6

ER -