↓ Skip to main content

Endoscopic vs. Microscopic Resection of Sellar Lesions—A Matched Analysis of Clinical and Socioeconomic Outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Endoscopic vs. Microscopic Resection of Sellar Lesions—A Matched Analysis of Clinical and Socioeconomic Outcomes
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2017.00033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tej D. Azad, Yu-Jin Lee, Daniel Vail, Anand Veeravagu, Peter H. Hwang, John K. Ratliff, Gordon Li

Abstract

Direct comparisons of microscopic and endoscopic resection of sellar lesions are scarce, with conflicting reports of cost and clinical outcome advantages. To determine if the proposed benefits of endoscopic resection are realized on a population level. We performed a matched cohort study of 9,670 adult patients in the MarketScan database who underwent either endoscopic or microscopic surgery for sellar lesions. Coarsened matching was applied to estimate the effects of surgical approach on complication rates, length of stay (LOS), costs, and likelihood of postoperative radiation. We found that LOS, readmission, and revision rates did not differ significantly between approaches. The overall complication rate was higher for endoscopy (47% compared to 39%, OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22-1.53). Endoscopic approach was associated with greater risk of neurological complications (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11-1.55), diabetes insipidus (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.37-2.00), and cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.07-3.13) compared to the microscopic approach. Although the total index payment was higher for patients receiving endoscopic resection ($32,959 compared to $29,977 for microscopic resection), there was no difference in long-term payments. Endoscopic surgery was associated with decreased likelihood of receiving post-resection stereotactic radiosurgery (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.90) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.93). Our results suggest that the transition from a microscopic to endoscopic approach to sellar lesions must be subject to careful evaluation. Although there are evident advantages to transsphenoidal endoscopy, our analysis suggests that the benefits of the endoscopic approach are yet to be materialized.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,556,449
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#941
of 2,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,933
of 316,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,959 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,706 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.