ObjectiveThe inter-rater reliability of the modified Knosp's classification was measured before the analysis. The clinical validity of the parasellar extension grading system was evaluated by investigating the extents of resection and complication rates among the grades in the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery (EETS) for pituitary adenomas.MethodsFrom November 2008 to August 2015, of the 286 patients who underwent EETS by the senior author, 208 were pituitary adenoma cases (146 non-functioning pituitary adenomas, 10 adrenocorticotropic hormone-secreting adenomas, 31 growth hormone-secreting adenomas, 17 prolactin-secreting adenomas, and 4 thyroid-stimulating hormone-secreting adenomas; 23 microadenomas, 174 macroadenomas, and 11 giant adenomas). Two neurosurgeons and a neuroradiologist independently measured the degree of parasellar extension on the preoperative sellar MRI according to the modified Knosp's classification. Inter-rater reliability was statistically assessed by measuring the intraclass correlation coefficient. The extents of resection were evaluated by comparison of the pre- and post-operative MR images; the neurovascular complications were assessed by reviewing the patients' medical records. The extent of resection was measured in each parasellar extension grade; thereafter, their statistical differences were calculated.ResultsThe intraclass correlation coefficient value of reliability across the three raters amounted to 0.862. The gross total removal (GTR) rates achieved in each grade were 70.0, 69.8, 62.9, 21.4, 37.5, and 4.3% in Grades 0, 1, 2, 3A, 3B, and 4, respectively. A significant difference in the extent of resection was observed only between Grades 2 and 3A. In addition, significantly higher complication rates were observed in the groups above Grade 3A.ConclusionAlthough the modified Knosp's classification system appears to be complex, its inter-rater reliability proves to be excellent. Regarding the clinical validity of the parasellar extension grading system, Grades 3A, 3B, and 4 have a negative predictive value for the GTR rate, with higher complication rates.
The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of intramuscular injection of atelocollagen for the prevention of paraspinal muscle atrophy after spine surgery. Atelcollagen has been widely used as an intradermal filler to restore soft tissue defect. Many studies demonstrated that atelocollagen provides good therapeutic results by promoting cell proliferation and enhances the healing effect on injured connective tissues such as tendons and fasciae, while causing few complications. Methods: A total of 118 patients who underwent single level of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PILF) between December 2017 and April 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. In the study group of 60 patients, 3 mL of gel-type 3% atelocollagen solution was prepared and injected into the multifidus muscle during wound closure. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by the improvement of back pain, elevation of a muscle enzyme, and inflammatory markers. Radiologic efficacy was evaluated with a comparison of density and cross-sectional area (CSA) of multifidus and erector spinae muscle in CT images. Results: Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back pain was not significantly lower in the study group postoperatively compared with the control group. The reduction of postoperative paraspinal muscle density and CSA was significantly lower in the study group. The serum level of muscle enzyme and inflammatory markers were significantly lower in the study group. No major procedure-related complications were observed during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Intramuscular injection of atelocollagen is safe and feasible for the prevention of paraspinal muscle atrophy after spine surgery. This novel method seems advantageous for accelerating wound healing without causing inflammation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.