2014
DOI: 10.3171/2014.7.focus14301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution from microscopic transoral to endoscopic endonasal odontoidectomy

Abstract: Object The goal of this study was to compare the indications, benefits, and complications between the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) and the microscopic transoral approach to perform an odontoidectomy. Transoral approaches have been standard for odontoidectomy procedures; however, the potential benefits of the EEA might be demonstrated to be a more innocuous technique. The authors present their experience with 12 consecutive cases that required odontoidectomy an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
59
0
6

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
59
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, Ponce-Gómez and colleagues reported their own series of patients treated using both approaches and found comparable rates of neurological improvement after odontoidectomy, with less time to extubation and oral feeding, as well as shorter hospital stay in the endonasal group. 13 However, the direct comparison of transoral and endonasal endoscopic approaches should be looked at carefully. The studies reporting both approaches may be affected by selection bias, due to a different patient population and indications.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Ponce-Gómez and colleagues reported their own series of patients treated using both approaches and found comparable rates of neurological improvement after odontoidectomy, with less time to extubation and oral feeding, as well as shorter hospital stay in the endonasal group. 13 However, the direct comparison of transoral and endonasal endoscopic approaches should be looked at carefully. The studies reporting both approaches may be affected by selection bias, due to a different patient population and indications.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…82 Others have compared the approaches in cadavers. 3 The advantages of the EEA include a decrease in tongue and oropharyngeal swelling and lack of a need for soft-palate division.…”
Section: Comparison Of the Endoscopic Endonasal And Standard Transoramentioning
confidence: 99%
“…18,28 Because the incision is made above the oropharynx and the oral cavity can be avoided without a transoral retractor or splitting of the soft palate, the endoscopic endonasal approach avoids the risk of tongue compression and subsequent swelling, tracheal swelling, velopharyngeal insufficiency, infection, and swallowing and breathing difficulties. 18,43,49 Postoperative recovery after endonasal skull base surgery is generally quicker, the hospital stays are shorter, and patients are fed orally and ambulate earlier in the postoperative period than patients who undergo transoral procedures. 6,14,18,43 The endoscopic endonasal approach for odontoidectomy has been investigated in cadaveric studies and in several clinical studies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%