Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 24, 2026
Endoscopic Endonasal Trans-sphenoidal Approach: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pituitary Adenomas
Published on: January 17, 2018
A comparison of endoscopic endonasal versus open approaches for skull base chordoma: a comprehensive National Cancer
Justin M Soffer1, Ruben Ulloa2, Sonja Chen3
11Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee.
Objective:
The authors of this study aimed to investigate independent prognostic factors of survival with a particular focus on comparing the safety and efficacy of endoscopic endonasal versus open approaches in the surgical management of skull base chordoma.
Methods:
A retrospective National Cancer Database review of skull base chordoma patients was performed to capture resection cases from 2010 to 2020, evaluating overall survival (OS), early postoperative mortality, readmission rates, and hospital length of stay (LOS) between surgical approaches and the independent prognostication of death utilizing Cox multivariate regression analysis.
Results:
Among the 736 patients included in the cohort, 456 patients (62.0%) and 280 patients (38.0%) underwent endoscopic endonasal and open resection, respectively. These values represent a rate of change over the study period of +4.1 versus -0.14 cases per year, respectively. Gross-total resection was achieved in 32.5% of cases. A positive margin status was found in 51.8% of cases. There was no association between extent of resection and surgical approach (p = 0.257). There was no difference in OS (p = 0.562), 30- and 90-day mortality (p = 0.209 and 0.126, respectively), and 30-day readmission (p = 0.438) between the two surgical groups. The mean LOS was reduced by 2.1 days in the endoscopic cohort (p = 0.013) compared with the open approach cohort. Finally, multivariate analysis revealed a tumor size ≥ 4 cm (HR 4.03, p = 0.005) and public insurance (HR 2.76, p = 0.004) as negative predictors of survival and treatment at an academic center (HR 0.36, p = 0.043) as a positive prognosticator of survival.
Conclusions:
The endoscopic endonasal approach has been increasingly utilized over time and touts noninferiority with respect to safety and efficacy with a marked improvement in LOS, which carries substantial implications for both healthcare costs and enhanced patient recovery. Future prospective studies are necessary to further delineate trends and surgical outcomes for skull base chordoma.
