PDF herunterladen
Semin Plast Surg 2020; 34(02): 099-105
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1709432
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Transpalatal Approaches to the Skull Base and Reconstruction: Indications, Technique, and Associated Morbidity

Nyall R. London Jr.
1   Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
2   Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
3   Sinonasal and Skull Base Tumor Program, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
,
Jimmy Y. W. Chan
4   Division of Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Hong Kong Medical Centre, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, People's Republic of China
,
Ricardo L. Carrau
1   Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
5   Department of Neurological Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
06. Mai 2020 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Multiple anterior surgical approaches are available to obtain access to the nasopharynx, clivus, and craniocervical junction. These include the direct and transoral robotic surgery transpalatal, maxillary swing, and endoscopic endonasal approaches. In this article, we describe the indications for these techniques, surgical steps, and associated morbidities. This article is a PubMed literature review. A review of the literature was conducted to assess the techniques, surgical steps, and associated morbidities with transpalatal approaches to the skull base and nasopharynx. The transpalatal approach has been traditionally utilized to obtain surgical access to the nasopharynx, clivus, and craniocervical junction. Morbidity includes velopalatine insufficiency due to shortening of the soft palate from scar contraction or neuromuscular damage, thus leading to hypernasal speech and dysphagia. Middle ear effusion and oronasal or oronasopharyngeal palatal fistula are additional potential morbidities. The choice of surgical approach depends on a variety of factors including the disease location and extent, surgeon experience, and available resources.

Keywords

transpalatal approach - maxillary swing - skull base surgery
 

  • References

  • 1 Enepekides DJ, Donald PJ. Transoral approaches to the clivus and nasopharynx. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2001; 34 (06) 1105-1121 , ix ix.
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Liu JK, Couldwell WT, Apfelbaum RI. Transoral approach and extended modifications for lesions of the ventral foramen magnum and craniovertebral junction. Skull Base 2008; 18 (03) 151-166
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Dubey SP, Molumi CP. Transpalatal approach with pedicled palatal osteo-muco-periosteal flap. ANZ J Surg 2012; 82 (06) 439-442
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Aldana PR, Naseri I, La Corte E. The naso-axial line: a new method of accurately predicting the inferior limit of the endoscopic endonasal approach to the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurgery 2012; 71 (2, Suppl Operative): ons308-ons314 , discussion ons314
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 de Almeida JR, Zanation AM, Snyderman CH. , et al. Defining the nasopalatine line: the limit for endonasal surgery of the spine. Laryngoscope 2009; 119 (02) 239-244
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Carrau RL, Prevedello DM, de Lara D, Durmus K, Ozer E. Combined transoral robotic surgery and endoscopic endonasal approach for the resection of extensive malignancies of the skull base. Head Neck 2013; 35 (11) E351-E358
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Chauvet D, Missistrano A, Hivelin M, Carpentier A, Cornu P, Hans S. Transoral robotic-assisted skull base surgery to approach the sella turcica: cadaveric study. Neurosurg Rev 2014; 37 (04) 609-617
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Chan JYW, Wong STS, Wei WI. Surgical salvage of recurrent T3 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: prognostic significance of clivus, maxillary, temporal and sphenoid bone invasion. Oral Oncol 2019; 91: 85-91
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Muhanna N, Chan H, Qiu J. , et al. Volumetric analysis of endoscopic and maxillary swing surgical approaches for nasopharyngectomy. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2018; 79 (05) 466-474
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Balasingam V, Anderson GJ, Gross ND. , et al. Anatomical analysis of transoral surgical approaches to the clivus. J Neurosurg 2006; 105 (02) 301-308
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Chan JY. Surgical salvage of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Curr Oncol Rep 2015; 17 (03) 433
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Myatt HM, Remedios D. A transpalatal approach to the parapharyngeal space. J Laryngol Otol 1997; 111 (02) 159-162
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Henry LE, Haugen TW, Rassekh CH, Adappa ND, Weinstein GS, O'Malley Jr BW. A novel transpalatal-transoral robotic surgery approach to clival chordomas extending into the nasopharynx. Head Neck 2019; 41 (08) E133-E140
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Chan JY, Tsang RK, Wei WI. Morbidities after maxillary swing nasopharyngectomy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 2015; 37 (04) 487-492
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Wei WI, Lam KH, Sham JS. New approach to the nasopharynx: the maxillary swing approach. Head Neck 1991; 13 (03) 200-207
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Au KH, Ngan RKC, Ng AWY. , et al. Treatment outcomes of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in modern era after intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in Hong Kong: a report of 3328 patients (HKNPCSG 1301 study). Oral Oncol 2018; 77: 16-21
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Leong YH, Soon YY, Lee KM, Wong LC, Tham IWK, Ho FCH. Long-term outcomes after reirradiation in nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: a meta-analysis. Head Neck 2018; 40 (03) 622-631
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Lam JW, Chan JY, Lui WM, Ho WK, Lee R, Tsang RK. Management of pseudoaneurysms of the internal carotid artery in postirradiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Laryngoscope 2014; 124 (10) 2292-2296
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Kalra GS, Midya M, Bedi M. Access to the skull base - maxillary swing procedure - long term analysis. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2018; 8 (01) 86-90
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 King WW, Ku PK, Mok CO, Teo PM. Nasopharyngectomy in the treatment of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a twelve-year experience. Head Neck 2000; 22 (03) 215-222
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Hao SP, Tsang NM, Chang CN. Salvage surgery for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002; 128 (01) 63-67
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Ng RW, Wei WI. Elimination of palatal fistula after the maxillary swing procedure. Head Neck 2005; 27 (07) 608-612
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Stippler M, Gardner PA, Snyderman CH, Carrau RL, Prevedello DM, Kassam AB. Endoscopic endonasal approach for clival chordomas. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (02) 268-277 , discussion 277–278
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Beer-Furlan A, Abi-Hachem R, Jamshidi AO, Carrau RL, Prevedello DM. Endoscopic trans-sphenoidal surgery for petroclival and clival meningiomas. J Neurosurg Sci 2016; 60 (04) 495-502
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Tang IP, Ngui LX, Ramachandran K. , et al. A 4-year review of surgical and oncological outcomes of endoscopic endonasal transpterygoid nasopharyngectomy in salvaging locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019; 276 (09) 2475-2482
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Vlantis AC, Lee DL, Wong EW, Chow SM, Ng SK, Chan JY. Endoscopic nasopharyngectomy in recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a case series, literature review, and pooled analysis. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2017; 7 (04) 425-432
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Al-Sheibani S, Zanation AM, Carrau RL. , et al. Endoscopic endonasal transpterygoid nasopharyngectomy. Laryngoscope 2011; 121 (10) 2081-2089
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Hosseini SM, McLaughlin N, Carrau RL. , et al. Endoscopic transpterygoid nasopharyngectomy: correlation of surgical anatomy with multiplanar CT. Head Neck 2013; 35 (05) 704-714
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 London Jr NR, Ishii M, Gallia G, Boahene KDO. Technique for reconstruction of large clival defects through an endoscopic-assisted tunneled retropharyngeal approach. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2018; 8 (12) 1454-1458
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Roger V, Patron V, Moreau S, Kanagalingam J, Babin E, Hitier M. Extended endonasal approach versus maxillary swing approach to the parapharyngeal space. Head Neck 2018; 40 (06) 1120-1130
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Rauso R, Tartaro G, Califano L, Rugge L, Chirico F, Colella G. Pedicled palatal flap for surgical repair of oro-nasal fistula. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 2018; 32 (06) 1565-1567
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Rochlin DH, Mittermiller PA, Sheckter CC, Menard RM. The pushback pharyngeal flap: an 18-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 143 (06) 1246e-1254e
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Ekin O, Calis M, Kulak Kayikci ME, Icen M, Gunaydin RO, Ozgur F. Modified superior-based pharyngeal flap is effective in treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency regardless of the preoperative closure pattern. J Craniofac Surg 2017; 28 (02) 413-417
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Emara TA, Quriba AS. Posterior pharyngeal flap for velopharyngeal insufficiency patients: a new technique for flap inset. Laryngoscope 2012; 122 (02) 260-265
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 El-Anwar MW, Elsheikh E, Askar S. Single-stage repair of palatal fistula and velopharyngeal incompetence by the new L flap. J Craniofac Surg 2018; 29 (01) e70-e73
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 36 Chegar BE, Shprintzen RJ, Curtis MS, Tatum SA. Pharyngeal flap and obstructive apnea: maximizing speech outcome while limiting complications. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2007; 9 (04) 252-259
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 37 Rivera-Serrano CM, Lentz AK, Pinheiro-Neto C, Snyderman CH. Cadaveric study of the posterior pedicle nasoseptal flap: a novel flap for reconstruction of pharyngeal defects and velopharyngeal insufficiency. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (05) 1269-1275
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 38 Zenga J, Sharon JD, Gross J, Gantz J, Pipkorn P. Soft palate reconstruction after radionecrosis: combined anterolateral thigh adipofascial and nasoseptal flaps. Auris Nasus Larynx 2018; 45 (04) 875-879
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 39 Kang SY, Eskander A, Hachem RA. , et al. Salvage skull base reconstruction in the endoscopic era: vastus lateralis free tissue transfer. Head Neck 2018; 40 (04) E45-E52
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar