No abstract

Background Endoscopic skull‐base surgery (ESBS) is employed in the management of diverse skull‐base pathologies. Paralleling the increased utilization of ESBS, the literature in this field has expanded rapidly. However, the rarity of these diseases, the inherent challenges of surgical studies, and the continued learning curve in ESBS have resulted in significant variability in the quality of the literature. To consolidate and critically appraise the available literature, experts in skull‐base surgery have produced the International Consensus Statement on Endoscopic Skull‐Base Surgery (ICAR:ESBS). Methods Using previously described methodology, topics spanning the breadth of ESBS were identified and assigned a literature review, evidence‐based review or evidence‐based review with recommendations format. Subsequently, each topic was written and then reviewed by skull‐base surgeons in both neurosurgery and otolaryngology. Following this iterative review process, the ICAR:ESBS document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results The ICAR:ESBS document addresses the role of ESBS in primary cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea, intradural tumors, benign skull‐base and orbital pathology, sinonasal malignancies, and clival lesions. Additionally, specific challenges in ESBS including endoscopic reconstruction and complication management were evaluated. Conclusion A critical review of the literature in ESBS demonstrates at least the equivalency of ESBS with alternative approaches in pathologies such as CSF rhinorrhea and pituitary adenoma as well as improved reconstructive techniques in reducing CSF leaks. Evidence‐based recommendations are limited in other pathologies and these significant knowledge gaps call upon the skull‐base community to embrace these opportunities and collaboratively address these shortcomings.

A lumbar drain is not routinely necessary for successful closure of CSF rhinorrhea of any size. Smaller dural defects may be safely performed on an outpatient basis without complications.

TER of ASB malignancy is associated with a decreased hospital stay and faster recovery when compared to open CFR. Lower local recurrence rate in the TER group may reflect a discrepancy in histology and clinical stage. We found no significant differences in survival, metastatic, or complication rates in the two groups, whereas patients in the TER group had the added benefit of a desirable cosmetic outcome. Overall, TER seems to be an excellent alternative to CFR in properly selected cases.

Objective To evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of olfactory or gustatory dysfunction in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Study Design Multicenter case series. Setting Five tertiary care hospitals (3 in China, 1 in France, 1 in Germany). Subjects and Methods In total, 394 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)–confirmed COVID-19-positive patients were screened, and those with olfactory or gustatory dysfunction were included. Data including demographics, COVID-19 severity, patient outcome, and the incidence and degree of olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction were collected and analyzed. The Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QOD) and visual analog scale (VAS) were used to quantify olfactory and gustatory dysfunction, respectively. All subjects at 1 hospital (Shanghai) without subjective olfactory complaints underwent objective testing. Results Of 394 screened subjects, 161 (41%) reported olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction and were included. Incidence of olfactory and/or gustatory disorders in Chinese (n = 239), German (n = 39), and French (n = 116) cohorts was 32%, 69%, and 49%, respectively. The median age of included subjects was 39 years, 92 of 161 (57%) were male, and 10 of 161 (6%) were children. Of included subjects, 10% had only olfactory or gustatory symptoms, and 19% had olfactory and/or gustatory complaints prior to any other COVID-19 symptom. Of subjects with objective olfactory testing, 10 of 90 demonstrated abnormal chemosensory function despite reporting normal subjective olfaction. Forty-three percent (44/102) of subjects with follow-up showed symptomatic improvement in olfaction or gustation. Conclusions Olfactory and/or gustatory disorders may represent early or isolated symptoms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. They may serve as a useful additional screening criterion, particularly for the identification of patients in the early stages of infection.