The inferior turbinate flap in skull base reconstruction

BACKGROUND: As the indications for expanded endonasal approaches continue to evolve, alternative reconstructive techniques are needed to address increasingly complex surgical skull base defects. In the absence of the nasoseptal flap, we describe our experience with the posterior pedicle inferior turbinate flap (PPITF) in skull base reconstruction. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: Academic tertiary care centre. METHODS: Patients who underwent reconstruction of the skull base with the PPITF were identified. Medical records were reviewed for demographic, presentation, treatment, follow-up, surgical and outcomes data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Flap survival, adequacy of seal, and complications. RESULTS: Two patients with residual/recurrent pituitary adenomas met the inclusion criteria. The nasoseptal flap was unavailable in each case due to a prior septectomy. Salvage of the original nasoseptal flap was not possible, as it did not provide adequate coverage of the resultant defect due to contraction from healing. All PPITFs healed uneventfully and covered the entire defect. No complications were observed in the early post-operative period. Endoscopic techniques and limitations of the PPITF are also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical experience supports the PPITF to be a viable alternative for reconstruction of the skull base in the absence of the nasoseptal flap

The inferior turbinate flap in skull base reconstruction

Abstract Background As the indications for expanded endonasal approaches continue to evolve, alternative reconstructive techniques are needed to address increasingly complex surgical skull base defects. In the absence of the nasoseptal flap, we describe our experience with the posterior pedicle inferior turbinate flap (PPITF) in skull base reconstruction. Design Case series. Setting Academic tertiary care centre. Methods Patients who underwent reconstruction of the skull base with the PPITF were identified. Medical records were reviewed for demographic, presentation, treatment, follow-up, surgical and outcomes data. Main outcome measures Flap survival, adequacy of seal, and complications. Results Two patients with residual/recurrent pituitary adenomas met the inclusion criteria. The nasoseptal flap was unavailable in each case due to a prior septectomy. Salvage of the original nasoseptal flap was not possible, as it did not provide adequate coverage of the resultant defect due to contraction from healing. All PPITFs healed uneventfully and covered the entire defect. No complications were observed in the early post-operative period. Endoscopic techniques and limitations of the PPITF are also discussed. Conclusions Our clinical experience supports the PPITF to be a viable alternative for reconstruction of the skull base in the absence of the nasoseptal flap

Quality of Life Following Endonasal Skull Base Surgery

The importance of quality of life (QOL) outcomes following treatments for head and neck tumors are now increasingly appreciated and measured to improve medical and surgical care for these patients. An understanding of the definitions in the setting of health care and the use of appropriate QOL instruments and measures are critical to obtain meaningful information that guides decision making in various aspects of patient health care. QOL outcomes following cranial base surgery is only recently being defined. In this article, we describe the current published data on QOL outcomes following cranial base surgery and provide preliminary prospective data on QOL outcomes and sinonasal morbidity in patients who underwent endonasal cranial base surgery for management of various skull base tumors at our institution. We used a disease-specific multidimensional instrument to measure QOL outcomes in these patients. Our results show that although sinonasal morbidity is increased, this is temporary, and the vast majority of patients have a very good QOL by 4 to 6 months after endonasal approach to the cranial base

CSO (Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery) position paper on rhinologic and skull base surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

Healthcare services in many countries have been partially or completely disrupted by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic since its onset in the end of 2019. Amongst the most impacted are the elective medical and surgical services in order to conserve resources to care for COVID-19 patients. As the number of infected patients decrease across Canada, elective surgeries are being restarted in a staged manner. Since Otolaryngologists – Head & Neck Surgeons manage surgical diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract where the highest viral load reside, it is imperative that these surgeries resume in a safe manner. The aim of this document is to compile the current best evidence available and provide expert consensus on the safe restart of rhinologic and skull base surgeries while discussing the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative care and tips. Risk assessment, patient selection, case triage, and pre-operative COVID-19 testing will be analyzed and discussed. These guidelines will also consider the optimal use of personal protective equipment for specific cases, general and specific operative room precautions, and practical tips of intra-operative maneuvers to optimize patient and provider safety. Given that the literature surrounding COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, these recommendations will serve to start our specialty back into elective rhinologic surgeries over the next months and they may change as we learn more about this disease.Medicine, Faculty ofNon UBCSurgery, Department ofReviewedFacult