• Ali M Elhadi, Hasan A Zaidi, Douglas A Hardesty, Richard Williamson, Claudio Cavallo, Mark C Preul, Peter Nakaji, and Andrew S Little.
• Division of Neurological Surgery, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, Arizona.
• Neurosurgery. 2014 Sep 1;10 Suppl 3:393-9; discussion 399.

BackgroundOne challenge when performing endoscopic endonasal approaches is the surgical conflict that occurs between the surgical instruments and endoscope in the crowded nasal corridor. This conflict decreases surgical freedom, increases surgeon frustration, and lengthens the learning curve for trainees.ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact a malleable endoscope has on surgical freedom for endoscopic approaches to the parasellar region.MethodsUninostril and binostril endoscopic transsphenoidal approaches to the pituitary gland and cavernous carotid arteries were performed on 8 silicon-injected, formalin-fixed cadaveric heads using both rigid and flexible 3-dimensional endoscopes. Surgical freedom to targets in the parasellar region was assessed using an established technique based on image guidance. Results are presented as 3 measurements: area of surgical freedom for a point target, area for the surgical field (cavernous carotids and sella), and angular surgical freedom (angle of attack).ResultsPoint target surgical freedom, exposed area surgical freedom, and angle of attack were all significantly greater in approaches using the malleable endoscope compared with the rigid endoscope (P values .06 to <.001), with values varying between 17% and 28%. The improved surgical freedom noted with the malleable endoscope was due to the minimization of instrument-endoscope conflict at the back end (camera) and front end (tip) of the endoscope.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that application of a malleable endoscope to transsphenoidal approaches to the parasellar region decreases instrument-endoscope conflict and improves surgical freedom.

7 keywords...

hide…