1. Advantages and caveats of endoscopic to the infratemporal fossa as isolated and combined techniques
- Author
-
Kittichai Mongkolkul, Eman H. Salem, Mohammad Bilal Alsavaf, Daniel M. Prevedello, Kyle Vankoevering, Kathleen Kelly, and Ricardo L. Carrau
- Subjects
area of exposure ,endoscopic surgery ,infratemporal fossa ,minimally access ,multiport approach ,surgical freedom ,Otorhinolaryngology ,RF1-547 ,Surgery ,RD1-811 - Abstract
Abstract Objective Identify the benefits and caveats of combining minimal access approaches to the infratemporal fossa (ITF), such as the endoscopic transnasal, endoscopic transorbital, endoscopic transoral, and endoscopic sublabial transmaxillary approaches to address extensive lesions not amenable to a single approach. The study provides anatomical metrics including area of exposure and degree of surgical freedom. Methods Five human cadaveric specimens (10 sides) were dissected to expose and methodically analyze the anatomical intricacies of the ITF using the following minimal access approaches: endoscopic transnasal transpterygoid (EETA), endoscopic sublabial transmaxillary, endoscopic transorbital via infraorbital foramen, and endoscopic transoral techniques. Area of exposure at the pterygopalatine fossa and surgical freedom at the ITF were obtained for each approach. Results The endoscopic sublabial transmaxillary sinus and the combined approach afford a significantly greater exposure than an isolated EETA. The difference in exposure (mean) between the endoscopic sublabial transmaxillary and EETA was 1.62 ± 0.85 cm2 (p
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF