This Consensus Statement from an international, multidisciplinary workshop sponsored by the Pituitary Society offers evidence-based graded consensus recommendations and key summary points for... Show moreThis Consensus Statement from an international, multidisciplinary workshop sponsored by the Pituitary Society offers evidence-based graded consensus recommendations and key summary points for clinical practice on the diagnosis and management of prolactinomas. Epidemiology and pathogenesis, clinical presentation of disordered pituitary hormone secretion, assessment of hyperprolactinaemia and biochemical evaluation, optimal use of imaging strategies and disease-related complications are addressed. In-depth discussions present the latest evidence on treatment of prolactinoma, including efficacy, adverse effects and options for withdrawal of dopamine agonist therapy, as well as indications for surgery, preoperative medical therapy and radiation therapy. Management of prolactinoma in special situations is discussed, including cystic lesions, mixed growth hormone-secreting and prolactin-secreting adenomas and giant and aggressive prolactinomas. Furthermore, considerations for pregnancy and fertility are outlined, as well as management of prolactinomas in children and adolescents, patients with an underlying psychiatric disorder, postmenopausal women, transgender individuals and patients with chronic kidney disease. The workshop concluded that, although treatment resistance is rare, there is a need for additional therapeutic options to address clinical challenges in treating these patients and a need to facilitate international registries to enable risk stratification and optimization of therapeutic strategies.This Consensus Statement, which is endorsed by the Pituitary Society, offers evidence-based graded consensus recommendations and key summary points for clinical practice on the diagnosis and management of prolactinomas. Show less
Adamina, M.; Ademuyiwa, A.; Adisa, A.; Bhangu, A.A.; Bravo, A.M.; Cunha, M.F.; ... ; Gill, R. 2022
Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer... Show moreAim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease. Show less
Purpose Postoperative cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea (CSFR) remains a frequent complication of endonasal approaches to pituitary and skull base tumours. Watertight skull base reconstruction is... Show morePurpose Postoperative cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea (CSFR) remains a frequent complication of endonasal approaches to pituitary and skull base tumours. Watertight skull base reconstruction is important in preventing CSFR. We sought to systematically review the current literature of available skull base repair techniques. Methods Pubmed and Embase databases were searched for studies (2000-2020) that (a) reported on the endonasal resection of pituitary and skull base tumours, (b) focussed on skull base repair techniques and/or postoperative CSFR risk factors, and (c) included CSFR data. Roles, advantages and disadvantages of each repair method were detailed. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed where possible. Results 193 studies were included. Repair methods were categorised based on function and anatomical level. There was absolute heterogeneity in repair methods used, with no independent studies sharing the same repair protocol. Techniques most commonly used for low CSFR risk cases were fat grafts, fascia lata grafts and synthetic grafts. For cases with higher CSFR risk, multilayer regimes were utilized with vascularized flaps, gasket sealing and lumbar drains. Lumbar drain use for high CSFR risk cases was supported by a randomised study (Oxford CEBM: Grade B recommendation), but otherwise there was limited high-level evidence. Pooled CSFR incidence by approach was 3.7% (CI 3-4.5%) for transsphenoidal, 9% (CI 7.2-11.3%) for expanded endonasal, and 5.3% (CI 3.4-7%) for studies describing both. Further meaningful meta-analyses of repair methods were not performed due to significant repair protocol heterogeneity. Conclusions Modern reconstructive protocols are heterogeneous and there is limited evidence to suggest the optimal repair technique after pituitary and skull base tumour resection. Further studies are needed to guide practice. Show less
Objective The extended endoscopic approach provides unimpaired visualization and direct access to ventral skull base pathology, but is associated with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak in up to 25% of... Show moreObjective The extended endoscopic approach provides unimpaired visualization and direct access to ventral skull base pathology, but is associated with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak in up to 25% of patients. To evaluate the impact of improved surgical techniques and devices to better repair skull base defects, we assessed published surgical outcomes of the extended endoscopic endonasal approach in the last two decades for a well-defined homogenous group of tuberculum sellae and olfactory groove meningioma patients. Methods Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for studies published between 2004 (first publications) and April 2020. We evaluated CSF leak as primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were gross total resection, improvement in visual outcomes in those presenting with a deficit, intraoperative arterial injury, and 30-day mortality. For the main analyses, publications were pragmatically grouped based on publication year in three categories: 2004-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2020. Results We included 29 studies describing 540 patients with tuberculum sellae and 115 with olfactory groove meningioma. The percentage patients with CSF leak dropped over time from 22% (95% CI: 6-43%) in studies published between 2004 and 2010, to 16% (95% CI: 11-23%) between 2011 and 2015, and 4% (95% CI: 1-9%) between 2016 and 2020. Outcomes of gross total resection, visual improvement, intraoperative arterial injury, and 30-day mortality remained stable over time Conclusions We report a noticeable decrease in CSF leak over time, which might be attributed to the development and improvement of new closure techniques (e.g., Hadad-Bassagasteguy flap, and gasket seal), refined multilayer repair protocols, and lumbar drain usage. Show less
Introduction The gold-standard treatment for symptomatic anterior skull base meningiomas is surgical resection. The endoscope-assisted supraorbital "keyhole" approach (eSKA) is a promising... Show moreIntroduction The gold-standard treatment for symptomatic anterior skull base meningiomas is surgical resection. The endoscope-assisted supraorbital "keyhole" approach (eSKA) is a promising technique for surgical resection of olfactory groove (OGM) and tuberculum sellae meningioma (TSM) but has yet to be compared with the microscopic transcranial (mTCA) and the expanded endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) in the context of existing literature. Methods An updated study-level meta-analysis on surgical outcomes and complications of OGM and TSM operated with the eSKA, mTCA, and EEA was conducted using random-effect models. Results A total of 2285 articles were screened, yielding 96 studies (2191 TSM and 1510 OGM patients). In terms of effectiveness, gross total resection incidence was highest in mTCA (89.6% TSM, 91.1% OGM), followed by eSKA (85.2% TSM, 84.9% OGM) and EEA (83.9% TSM, 82.8% OGM). Additionally, the EEA group had the highest incidence of visual improvement (81.9% TSM, 54.6% OGM), followed by eSKA (65.9% TSM, 52.9% OGM) and mTCA (63.9% TSM, 45.7% OGM). However, in terms of safety, the EEA possessed the highest cerebrospinal fluid leak incidence (9.2% TSM, 14.5% OGM), compared with eSKA (2.1% TSM, 1.6% OGM) and mTCA (1.6% TSM, 6.5% OGM). Finally, mortality and intraoperative arterial injury were 1% or lower across all subgroups. Conclusions In the context of diverse study populations, the eSKA appeared not to be associated with increased adverse outcomes when compared with mTCA and EEA and offered comparable effectiveness. Case-selection is paramount in establishing a role for the eSKA in anterior skull base tumours. Show less
