Intraoperative CSF leaks can occur during endoscopic sellar surgery, especially in larger tumors or craniopharyngiomas. Once an intraoperative leak occurs, risk factors for postoperative leaks include craniopharyngiomas and higher BMI. Use of septal flaps decreases this risk.

Postoperative endoscopic pituitary adenoma surgery complications are associated with tumors with intraventricular extension, preoperative radiation, as well as common patient comorbidities. Identification of these factors may permit implementation of strategies to reduce postoperative complications.

Objectives Determine the effect of endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) on long‐term olfactory outcomes after surgery. Methods An English‐language search was conducted using the Cochrane, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase databases from January 2000 to October 2017 for adult patients undergoing ESBS with subjective and objective olfaction outcomes. Two authors independently examined articles to identify those meeting inclusion criteria. Studies examining objective olfactory outcomes after ESBS were included in the meta‐analysis. A random‐effects meta‐analysis of patients undergoing sellar and parasellar ESBS was conducted to compare preoperative and postoperative olfactory outcomes using the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and Cross‐Cultural Smell Identification Test (CCSIT). Results Among 339 eligible articles, 29 articles met inclusion criteria. Twenty‐five of these focused on sellar and parasellar tumors. Individual articles not meeting criteria for meta‐analysis were qualitatively reported. Meta‐analysis showed there was no difference in preoperative and postoperative olfactory function after sellar and parasellar ESBS based on the UPSIT (five studies, mean difference [MD] = −1.03; 95% CI: −3.98, 1.93; P = .50) and the CCIST (three studies, MD = −0.77; 95% CI: −3.03, 1.49; P = .50). A pooled overall meta‐analysis revealed similar results (eight studies, effect size = −0.30; 95% CI: −0.79, 0.18; P = .22). However, heterogeneity for all meta‐analyses was high (I2 > 95%, P < .01), suggesting significant variation in the included studies. Conclusions Based on published objective olfaction outcomes after sellar and parasellar ESBS, there was no significant difference between preoperative and postoperative olfaction. Further prospective studies using validated objective measures of olfaction are required to improve our understanding on this subject. Level of Evidence 2a Laryngoscope, 129:1998–2007, 2019

Objectives/Hypothesis Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) is a rare malignant neoplasm. No study to date has analyzed the impact that nodal metastases and distant metastases at diagnosis have on overall survival (OS) and disease‐specific survival (DSS). Study Design Retrospective database review. Methods The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for cases of SNMM. Descriptive statistics were used analyze patient demographic and clinicopathologic variables. The Kaplan‐Meier model was used to analyze survival, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used for multivariate analysis. Results Three hundred twenty‐eight cases of SNMM were identified. The most frequent sinonasal anatomic location was the nasal cavity in 279 (73.0%) patients, followed by the maxillary sinus in 60 (15.7%) patients. Regional nodal metastases at diagnosis occurred in 33 (8.6%) patients, whereas distant metastases at diagnosis occurred in 41 (10.7%) patients. Five‐year OS was 22.7%, and 5‐year DSS was 26.8%. The presence of positive nodes at diagnosis (OS P < .0001, DSS P < .0001), distant metastases at diagnosis (OS P = .0442, DSS P = .0442), primary tumor site (OS P < .0001, DSS P < .0001), and increasing age (OS P = .0012, DSS P = .0016) were found to be significant as negative predictors of OS and DSS. Conclusions SNMM is a rare pathologic entity with a poor prognosis. The presence of nodal and distant metastases at diagnosis are negative prognostic factors in OS and DSS. These factors can be used in the development of new models of risk stratification and to inform treatment strategies and surveillance patterns. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 130:622–627, 2020

Lumbar drains are not necessary in the settings of low-flow CSF leaks or even in all high-flow leaks. We consider the use of a lumbar drain in settings wherein a high-flow leak is encountered or anticipated and the patient has other risk factors that may make the risk of postoperative CSF leak higher or closure of the leak more difficult.