Search

Objective: To determine in-hospital costs associated with performing an EEA to anterior skull base pathology and to identify drivers of cost variability for patients undergoing endoscopic anterior skull base surgery. Methods: All endoscopic anterior skull base surgeries performed over a period from January 1st, 2015 to October 24th, 2017 were evaluated. The electronic medical record was reviewed for patient factors, tumor characteristics, and cost variables associated with each hospital stay and univariate analysis was performed using Stata software. Results: An EEA was associated with an average total in-hospital cost of $44 545. Compared to patients undergoing a transsphenoidal approach to pituitary tumor resection, EEA patients incurred higher in-hospital costs across all variables including a total cost increase of $15 921 (95% confidence interval $5720-26 122, P =.002). Univariate analysis of all endoscopic anterior skull base surgery patients showed a cost increase of $30 616 associated with post-operative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak ($10 420-50 811, P =.004), $14 610 with post-operative diabetes insipidus (DI) ($4610-24 609, P =.004), and $11 522 with African-American patients relative to Caucasian patients ($3049-19 995, P =.008). Conclusions: Patients who undergo endoscopic EEA for resection of anterior skull base tumors typically incur greater in-hospital costs than patients undergoing a standard TSA. Post-operative complications such as CSF leak and DI, as well as ethnicity, are significant drivers of cost-variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are adverse effects after surgery, which may increase the risk of complications. Aprepitant is a neurokinin‐1 receptor blocker and has been shown to reduce chemotherapy‐related nausea and vomiting and PONV. However, its role in endoscopic skull base surgery remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of aprepitant in reducing PONV in endoscopic transsphenoidal (TSA) pituitary surgery. Methods: A retrospective chart review between July 2021 and January 2023 of 127 consecutive patients who underwent TSA was performed at a tertiary academic institution. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on preoperative aprepitant use. Two groups were matched based on known risk factors of PONV (age, sex, nonsmoking, and history of PONV). The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV. Secondary outcome measures included the number of anti‐emetic use, length of stay, and postoperative cererebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak. Results: After matching, 48 patients were included in each group. The aprepitant group demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of vomiting than the non‐aprepitant group (2.1% vs 22.9%, p = 0.002). The number of nausea episodes and anti‐emetic use decreased with aprepitant use (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the incidence of nausea, length of stay, or postoperative CSF leak. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that aprepitant decreased the incidence of postoperative vomiting with odds ratio of 0.107. Conclusion: Aprepitant may serve as a useful preoperative treatment to reduce PONV in patients undergoing TSA. Further studies are needed to evaluate its impact in other arenas of endoscopic skull base surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Postoperative management strategies for endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) vary widely because of limited evidence‐based guidance. Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were systematically reviewed from January 1990 through February 2022 to examine 18 postoperative considerations for ESBS. Nonhuman studies, articles written in a language other than English, and case reports were excluded. Studies were assessed for levels of evidence, and each topic's aggregate grade of evidence was evaluated. Results: A total of 74 studies reporting on 18 postoperative practices were reviewed. Postoperative pain management, prophylactic antibiotics, and lumbar drain use had the highest grades of evidence (B). The literature currently lacks high quality evidence for a majority of the reviewed ESBS precautions. There were no relevant studies to address postoperative urinary catheter use and medical intracranial pressure reduction. Conclusion: The evidence for postoperative ESBS precautions is heterogeneous, scarce, and generally of low quality. Although this review identified the best evidence available in the literature, it suggests the urgent need for more robust evidence. Therefore, additional high‐quality studies are needed in order to devise optimal postoperative ESBS protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]