Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region

Background. The pineal region represents significant challenges in terms of neurosurgery. Currently, anatomical research that simulates surgery for the endoscopic keyhole approach to the pineal region is lacking. This study aims to summarize the exposure range and operational characteristics of tota...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hao Wu, Aierpati Maimaiti, Qiang Xie, Yirizhati Aili, Mamutijiang Muertizha, Guohua Zhu, Maimaitili Mijiti, Yandong Li, Yongxin Wang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-01-01
Series:International Journal of Clinical Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6851468
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850218246657015808
author Hao Wu
Aierpati Maimaiti
Qiang Xie
Yirizhati Aili
Mamutijiang Muertizha
Guohua Zhu
Maimaitili Mijiti
Yandong Li
Yongxin Wang
author_facet Hao Wu
Aierpati Maimaiti
Qiang Xie
Yirizhati Aili
Mamutijiang Muertizha
Guohua Zhu
Maimaitili Mijiti
Yandong Li
Yongxin Wang
author_sort Hao Wu
collection DOAJ
description Background. The pineal region represents significant challenges in terms of neurosurgery. Currently, anatomical research that simulates surgery for the endoscopic keyhole approach to the pineal region is lacking. This study aims to summarize the exposure range and operational characteristics of total endoscopic surgery under the four supratentorial and infratentorial keyhole approaches, through rigorous quantitative anatomical research. We also aim to understand the surgical exposure characteristics and surgical feasibility under each approach. Method. Six wet cadaveric head specimens (a total of 12 sides) were subjected to simulated surgery with a keyhole bone window size of approximately 3 × 4 cm. The median endoscopic supracerebellar infratentorial approach (M-ESCITA), the paramedian endoscopic supracerebellar infratentorial approach (PM-ESCITA), the endoscopic occipital transtentorial approach (EOTA), and the endoscopic interhemispheric high occipital transtentorial approach (EHOTA) were used to measure the surgical path depth, maximum distance between the tentorial margins, maximum operable area, operable angle, and relative degree of freedom of each approach. Results. There was no difference in the exposure range of the surgical area. The surgical path of PM-ESCITA was the longest (p<0.001), and its horizontal operating angle was the largest (p<0.001), whereas the anteroposterior operating angle of EHOTA was the largest (p<0.001). The maximum operational area of M-ESCITA was the largest in the pineal region (p<0.01), whereas that of EHOTA was the largest in the tetrapod region (p<0.001). M-ESCITA had the highest relative degree of freedom during surgery at the pineal gland level (p<0.001), PM-ESCITA at the splenium of the corpus callosum (p<0.01), and EHOTA at the corpora quadrigemina (p<0.001). Conclusions. Each of the four endoscopic keyhole approaches has its own advantages. Through anatomical research, doctors can train themselves and master the differences in surgical procedures through different approaches. The choice of approach and surgical challenge are dependent on the microsurgical techniques employed by the surgeon. A balance between minimally invasive and safe endoscopic surgery should be pursued.
format Article
id doaj-art-3dec12fb2f4445b1a449de58bdf4213c
institution OA Journals
issn 1742-1241
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series International Journal of Clinical Practice
spelling doaj-art-3dec12fb2f4445b1a449de58bdf4213c2025-08-20T02:07:49ZengWileyInternational Journal of Clinical Practice1742-12412024-01-01202410.1155/2024/6851468Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal RegionHao Wu0Aierpati Maimaiti1Qiang Xie2Yirizhati Aili3Mamutijiang Muertizha4Guohua Zhu5Maimaitili Mijiti6Yandong Li7Yongxin Wang8Department of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryDepartment of NeurosurgeryBackground. The pineal region represents significant challenges in terms of neurosurgery. Currently, anatomical research that simulates surgery for the endoscopic keyhole approach to the pineal region is lacking. This study aims to summarize the exposure range and operational characteristics of total endoscopic surgery under the four supratentorial and infratentorial keyhole approaches, through rigorous quantitative anatomical research. We also aim to understand the surgical exposure characteristics and surgical feasibility under each approach. Method. Six wet cadaveric head specimens (a total of 12 sides) were subjected to simulated surgery with a keyhole bone window size of approximately 3 × 4 cm. The median endoscopic supracerebellar infratentorial approach (M-ESCITA), the paramedian endoscopic supracerebellar infratentorial approach (PM-ESCITA), the endoscopic occipital transtentorial approach (EOTA), and the endoscopic interhemispheric high occipital transtentorial approach (EHOTA) were used to measure the surgical path depth, maximum distance between the tentorial margins, maximum operable area, operable angle, and relative degree of freedom of each approach. Results. There was no difference in the exposure range of the surgical area. The surgical path of PM-ESCITA was the longest (p<0.001), and its horizontal operating angle was the largest (p<0.001), whereas the anteroposterior operating angle of EHOTA was the largest (p<0.001). The maximum operational area of M-ESCITA was the largest in the pineal region (p<0.01), whereas that of EHOTA was the largest in the tetrapod region (p<0.001). M-ESCITA had the highest relative degree of freedom during surgery at the pineal gland level (p<0.001), PM-ESCITA at the splenium of the corpus callosum (p<0.01), and EHOTA at the corpora quadrigemina (p<0.001). Conclusions. Each of the four endoscopic keyhole approaches has its own advantages. Through anatomical research, doctors can train themselves and master the differences in surgical procedures through different approaches. The choice of approach and surgical challenge are dependent on the microsurgical techniques employed by the surgeon. A balance between minimally invasive and safe endoscopic surgery should be pursued.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6851468
spellingShingle Hao Wu
Aierpati Maimaiti
Qiang Xie
Yirizhati Aili
Mamutijiang Muertizha
Guohua Zhu
Maimaitili Mijiti
Yandong Li
Yongxin Wang
Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
International Journal of Clinical Practice
title Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
title_full Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
title_fullStr Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
title_full_unstemmed Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
title_short Quantitative Anatomical Study of the Supratentorial and Infratentorial “Endoscopic Keyhole” Approach to the Peripineal Region
title_sort quantitative anatomical study of the supratentorial and infratentorial endoscopic keyhole approach to the peripineal region
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6851468
work_keys_str_mv AT haowu quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT aierpatimaimaiti quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT qiangxie quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT yirizhatiaili quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT mamutijiangmuertizha quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT guohuazhu quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT maimaitilimijiti quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT yandongli quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion
AT yongxinwang quantitativeanatomicalstudyofthesupratentorialandinfratentorialendoscopickeyholeapproachtotheperipinealregion