Object In this paper the authors' goal was to compare the accuracy of computer-navigated pedicle screw insertion with nonnavigated techniques in the published literature. Methods The authors performed a systematic literature review using the National Center for Biotechnology Information Database (PubMed/MEDLINE) using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms “Neuronavigation,” “Therapy, computer assisted,” and “Stereotaxic techniques,” and the text word “pedicle.” Included in the meta-analysis were randomized control trials or patient cohort series, all of which compared computer-navigated spine surgery (CNSS) and nonassisted pedicle screw insertions. The primary end point was pedicle perforation, while the secondary end points were operative time, blood loss, and complications. Results Twenty studies were included for analysis; of which there were 18 cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trials published between 2000 and 2011. Foreign-language papers were translated. The total number of screws included was 8539 (4814 navigated and 3725 nonnavigated). The most common indications for surgery were degenerative disease, spinal deformity, myelopathy, tumor, and trauma. Navigational methods were primarily based on CT imaging. All regions of the spine were represented. The relative risk for pedicle screw perforation was determined to be 0.39 (p < 0.001), favoring navigation. The overall pedicle screw perforation risk for navigation was 6%, while the overall pedicle screw perforation risk was 15% for conventional insertion. No related neurological complications were reported with navigated insertion (4814 screws total); there were 3 neurological complications in the nonnavigated group (3725 screws total). Furthermore, the meta-analysis did not reveal a significant difference in total operative time and estimated blood loss when comparing the 2 modalities. Conclusions There is a significantly lower risk of pedicle perforation for navigated screw insertion compared with nonnavigated insertion for all spinal regions.

Object The purpose of this study was to analyze preoperative predictors of endocrinological remission following endonasal endoscopic resection of therapy-resistant prolactin-, growth hormone (GH)–, and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)–secreting pituitary adenomas and to establish benchmarks for cure by using the most recent consensus criteria. Methods The authors reviewed a prospective database of 86 consecutive functional pituitary adenomas that were resected by a purely endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal technique. Extent of resection was evaluated on postoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Endocrinological remission was defined according to the most recent consensus criteria. Results The majority of functional adenomas (62.8%) were classified as macroadenomas (> 1 cm in maximum diameter), and 20.9% of lesions had invaded the cavernous sinus (CS) at the time of surgery. A gross-total resection was achieved in 75.6% of all patients. The rate of endocrinological remission differed between various types of functional adenomas. Cure rates were 92.3% (microadenomas) and 57.1% (macroadenomas) for prolactinomas, 75% (microadenomas) and 40% (macroadenomas) for GH-secreting tumors, and 54.5% (microadenomas) and 71.4% (macroadenomas) for ACTH-secreting tumors. Lower rates of cure occurred in GH-secreting macroadenomas due to a high rate of CS invasion, and in ACTH-secreting adenomas due to a high rate of lesions that were not visible on preoperative MR imaging. Whereas univariate analysis showed that macroadenoma, suprasellar, cavernous extension, or extent of resection correlated with cure, on multivariate analysis, only extent of resection and suprasellar extension predicted cure. One patient developed postoperative meningitis that was complicated by hydrocephalus requiring a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. Two patients developed postoperative panhypopituitarism, and 2 patients suffered from CSF leaks, which were treated with lumbar CSF diversion. Conclusions This paper reports benchmarks for endocrinological cure as well as complications in a large series of purely endoscopic pituitary surgeries by using the most recent consensus criteria. The advantages of extended endonasal approaches are most profound in tumors with suprasellar extension and CS invasion.