الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 146 |  |  |
| | | from | 146 | | |
Abstract
Objective: This cadaveric study aims to illustrate the lateral transorbital (LTO), transantral transpterygoid (TATP), and endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEA) to Meckel’s cave (MC), defining their surgical freedom, area of exposure, and advantages and limitations; thus, refining their respective indications. Design: cadaveric study.Setting: The Anatomical Laboratory for Visuospatial Innovations in Otolaryngology and Neurosurgery (ALT-VISION) at the Ohio State University, Wexner Medical Center.Participants: Bilateral dissections of five injected cadavers (10 sides).Main Outcome Measures: distance to targets, surgical freedom, and area of exposure provided by the EEA, TATP, and LTO approaches. Results: The TATP approach provides superior surgical freedom to foramen rotundum (FR) (167.70 ± 29.762 mm). However, surgical freedom to foramen ovale (FO) was best when using the LTO approach (75.01 ± 15.773 mm). The EEA provides a superior exposure of the medial MC (mean area of 587.69 ± 38.59 mm2). The LTO and TATP approaches provide equivalent access to the lateral MC (ranging from 468.90 ± 26.98 mm2 for TATP, and 650.11 ± 35.76 mm2 for LTO approach). Combining approaches increase the area of exposure significantly (1237.79 ± 48.41 mm2, 1056.59 ± 48.12 mm2 for EEA & LTO versus EEA & TATP).Conclusion: This study thoroughly emphasizes the pros and cons of the aforementioned approaches. Each approach may be applied in selected cases as a single or as part of a combined technique. However, conventional approaches are still indicated according to extent and pathology.