1. |
- Agosti, Edoardo, et al.
(author)
-
Quantitative Anatomic Comparison of Endoscopic Transnasal and Microsurgical Transcranial Approaches to the Anterior Cranial Fossa
- 2022
-
In: Operative Neurosurgery. - : Congress of Neurological Surgeons. - 2332-4252 .- 2332-4260. ; 23:4, s. e256-e266
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Several microsurgical transcranial approaches (MTAs) and endoscopic transnasal approaches (EEAs) to the anterior cranial fossa (ACF) have been described.OBJECTIVE: To provide a preclinical, quantitative, anatomic, comparative analysis of surgical approaches to the ACF.METHODS: Five alcohol-fixed specimens underwent high-resolution computed tomography. The following approaches were performed on each specimen: EEAs (transcribriform, transtuberculum, and transplanum), anterior MTAs (transfrontal sinus interhemispheric, frontobasal interhemispheric, and subfrontal with unilateral and bilateral frontal craniotomy), and anterolateral MTAs (supraorbital, minipterional, pterional, and frontotemporal orbitozygomatic approach). An optic neuronavigation system and dedicated software (ApproachViewer, part of GTx-Eyes II—UHN) were used to quantify the working volume of each approach and extrapolate the exposure of different ACF regions. Mixed linear models with random intercepts were used for statistical analyses.RESULTS: EEAs offer a large and direct route to the midline region of ACF, whose most anterior structures (ie, crista galli, cribriform plate, and ethmoidal roof) are also well exposed by anterior MTAs, whereas deeper ones (ie, planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae) are also well exposed by anterolateral MTAs. The orbital roof region is exposed by both anterolateral and lateral MTAs. The posterolateral region (ie, sphenoid wing and optic canal) is well exposed by anterolateral MTAs.CONCLUSION: Anterior and anterolateral MTAs play a pivotal role in the exposure of most anterior and posterolateral ACF regions, respectively, whereas midline regions are well exposed by EEAs. Furthermore, certain anterolateral approaches may be most useful when involvement of the optic canal and nerves involvement are suspected.
|
|
2. |
- Haupt, Riccardo, et al.
(author)
-
The ‘Survivorship Passport’ for childhood cancer survivors
- 2018
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049. ; 102, s. 69-81
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Currently, there are between 300,000 and 500,000 childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) in Europe. A significant proportion is at high risk, and at least 60% of them develop adverse health-related outcomes that can appear several years after treatment completion. Many survivors are unaware of their personal risk, and there seems to be a general lack of information among healthcare providers about pathophysiology and natural history of treatment-related complications. This can generate incorrect or delayed diagnosis and treatments. Method: The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) consists of electronic documents, which summarise the clinical history of the childhood or adolescent cancer survivor. It was developed by paediatric oncologists of the PanCare and SIOPE networks and IT experts of Cineca, together with parents, patients, and survivors’ organisations within the European Union–funded European Network for Cancer research in Children and Adolescents. It consists of a template of a web-based, simply written document, translatable in all European languages, to be given to each CCS. The SurPass provides a summary of each survivor's clinical history, with detailed information about the original cancer and of treatments received, together with personalised follow-up and screening recommendations based on guidelines published by the International Guidelines Harmonization Group and PanCareSurFup. Results: The SurPass data schema contains a maximum of 168 variables and uses internationally approved nomenclature, except for radiotherapy fields, where a new classification was defined by radiotherapy experts. The survivor-specific screening recommendations are mainly based on treatment received and are automatically suggested, thanks to built-in algorithms. These may be adapted and further individualised by the treating physician in case of special disease and survivor circumstances. The SurPass was tested at the Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Italy, and received positive feedback. It is now being integrated at the institutional, regional and national level. Conclusions: The SurPass is potentially an essential tool for improved and more harmonised follow-up of CCS. It also has the potential to be a useful tool for empowering CCSs to be responsible for their own well-being and preventing adverse events whenever possible. With sufficient commitment on the European level, this solution should increase the capacity to respond more effectively to the needs of European CCS.
|
|