Search

Craniopharyngiomas are disembryogenetic, benign, tumors that origin from squamous epithelial remnants of Rathke's pouch, developing from any segment of its course, virtually from rhino-pharynx to the hypothalamus. Historically, different microscopic transcranial routes, have been advocated as possible surgical options for the treatment of craniopharyngiomas. The endonasal technique offers a direct approach that permits access to the suprasellar, retrosellar and retroclival space, obviating brain retraction; it provides the advantage of appraoching cranioopharyngiomas without optic nerve manipulation and/or retraction. We herein present the surgical nuances of the endoscopic endonasal approach for the treatment of craniopharyngiomas, highlighting hints, advantages and drawbacks, also in regards of the anatomy dealt with. The endoscopic endonasal technique has been emerging as a viable approach/alternative for the treatment of this disease as the endoscope itself increased its safety and effectiveness. It allows the removal of both infra and supradiaphragmatic lesions - eventually involving the third ventricle chamber but not extending laterally off the ICA out of the visibility and maneuverability of the instruments - avoiding brain and optic nerve manipulation and retraction, with good visualization of the pituitary gland and stalk and the main neurovascular structures.

Introduction: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is currently considered a promising neuromodulation therapy for refractory epilepsy not suitable for resective surgery. Several anatomical targets and different stimulation approaches have been proposed in order to obtain satisfactory seizures reduction. As expected, according with different patterns of neural pathways involvement, the efficacy of each anatomical target stimulation in reducing seizure frequency varies among the different epileptic syndromes., Evidence Acquisition: We reviewed the current literature on this topic to provide an overview of the clinical efficacy of the main stimulation targets (anterior nucleus of the thalamus [ANT], hippocampus formation [HF] and centromedian nucleus of the thalamus [CMT]) related to the different epileptic syndromes. We also summarized the available data concerning side effects, neuropsychological outcome, quality of life and future perspective of DBS in intractable epilepsy., Evidence Synthesis: Encouraging results were reported for each target stimulation. However, only in ANT and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) the efficacy and safety were tested on large series of patients and achieving class I evidence level., Conslusions: We concluded that responsive stimulation could be more appropriate in focal epilepsy, while ANT stimulation could be properly performed also in multifocal seizures with predominant limbic involvement. Despite the small samples size, HF stimulation reduces seizure frequency in (bi) temporal lobe epilepsy, as well as CMT stimulation is able to reduce, seizure frequency, in generalized epilepsy.