中华医学杂志
中華醫學雜誌
중화의학잡지
National Medical Journal of China
2008年
23期
1627-1629
,共3页
贾桂军%万伟庆%倪明%贾旺%周大彪%张冰克%关树森%张俊廷
賈桂軍%萬偉慶%倪明%賈旺%週大彪%張冰剋%關樹森%張俊廷
가계군%만위경%예명%가왕%주대표%장빙극%관수삼%장준정
垂体肿瘤%显微外科手术
垂體腫瘤%顯微外科手術
수체종류%현미외과수술
Pituitary neoplasm%Microsurgery
目的 探讨巨大型垂体腺瘤在手术中垂体柄的保护及其临床意义.方法 巨大型垂体腺瘤45例,男23例,女22例,平均年龄40.8岁.其中12例为侵袭性垂体腺瘤,全部病例均根据影像学资料施行适宜的开颅肿瘤切除术,记录术中垂体柄与肿瘤的解剖学关系,总结垂体柄保护的方法及注意事项.结果 45例中肿瘤全切除25例,近全切除12例,大部切除8例.33例非侵袭性垂体腺瘤中,术中均见到垂体柄且形态良好;侵袭性垂体腺瘤有5例未见到垂体柄,可见到垂体柄的患者中部分(4例)形态不完整.12例侵袭性垂体腺瘤中,2例术后出现残余肿瘤出血,二次手术后有1例患者死于术后下丘脑损伤.结论 巨大垂体腺瘤瘤体与垂体柄的毗邻关系多样:垂体柄位于肿瘤侧方(左或右)、后上方者最为常见,而位于肿瘤前方者少见;侵袭性垂体腺瘤中,肿瘤与垂体柄的关系不甚明确.但术中辨清并保护好垂体柄将直接影响手术疗效及患者预后.
目的 探討巨大型垂體腺瘤在手術中垂體柄的保護及其臨床意義.方法 巨大型垂體腺瘤45例,男23例,女22例,平均年齡40.8歲.其中12例為侵襲性垂體腺瘤,全部病例均根據影像學資料施行適宜的開顱腫瘤切除術,記錄術中垂體柄與腫瘤的解剖學關繫,總結垂體柄保護的方法及註意事項.結果 45例中腫瘤全切除25例,近全切除12例,大部切除8例.33例非侵襲性垂體腺瘤中,術中均見到垂體柄且形態良好;侵襲性垂體腺瘤有5例未見到垂體柄,可見到垂體柄的患者中部分(4例)形態不完整.12例侵襲性垂體腺瘤中,2例術後齣現殘餘腫瘤齣血,二次手術後有1例患者死于術後下丘腦損傷.結論 巨大垂體腺瘤瘤體與垂體柄的毗鄰關繫多樣:垂體柄位于腫瘤側方(左或右)、後上方者最為常見,而位于腫瘤前方者少見;侵襲性垂體腺瘤中,腫瘤與垂體柄的關繫不甚明確.但術中辨清併保護好垂體柄將直接影響手術療效及患者預後.
목적 탐토거대형수체선류재수술중수체병적보호급기림상의의.방법 거대형수체선류45례,남23례,녀22례,평균년령40.8세.기중12례위침습성수체선류,전부병례균근거영상학자료시행괄의적개로종류절제술,기록술중수체병여종류적해부학관계,총결수체병보호적방법급주의사항.결과 45례중종류전절제25례,근전절제12례,대부절제8례.33례비침습성수체선류중,술중균견도수체병차형태량호;침습성수체선류유5례미견도수체병,가견도수체병적환자중부분(4례)형태불완정.12례침습성수체선류중,2례술후출현잔여종류출혈,이차수술후유1례환자사우술후하구뇌손상.결론 거대수체선류류체여수체병적비린관계다양:수체병위우종류측방(좌혹우)、후상방자최위상견,이위우종류전방자소견;침습성수체선류중,종류여수체병적관계불심명학.단술중변청병보호호수체병장직접영향수술료효급환자예후.
Objective To investigate and elucidate how to preserve the pituitary stalk in the microsurgery of giant pituitary adenoma ( GPA) and its clinical significance. Methods 45 GPA patients, 23 males and 22 female; aged 40. 8, including 12 cases of invasive pituitary adenoma ( IPA) underwent craniotomy based on the respective preoperative neuroradiological imaging characteristics. The anatomical relationship between the pituitary stalk and tumor was recorded. The methods to protect the pituitary stalk were summarized. Results Total tumor excision was achieved in 25 patients (55. 5% ) , near-total resection was done in 12 (26.7%), and subtotal resection in 8 (17.8%). During the surgical proceeding, the pituitary stalk was distinguished from the tumor and preserved well in all 33 cases with non-invasive giant pituitary adenoma On the contrary, in the 12 cases of invasive giant pituitary adenoma (IPA) the pituitary stalk was visualized in only 7 cases. In the patients with visualized pituitary stalks 4 pituitary stalks were not identified very well. In most cases(91% )the pituitary stalks were located laterally (on the left or right side) or supero-posterior to the tumor, only a few were located anteriorly. In all 12 IPA patients 2 cases of postoperative hemorrhage occurred associated with remnant tumor and immediate hematoma evacuation was performed, however, one patient died due to hypothalamus injury. Conclusion Pituitary stalk has various anatomical relationships to the entity of GPA; most are located lateral or supero-posterior to the tumor. However, the relationship between the stalk and tumor is not clear in IPA. Identifying and preserving the pituitary stalk well during surgical manipulation will be beneficial to get an excellent outcome.