Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 408

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PURE ENDOSCOPIC ENDONASAL APPROACH FOR PITUITARY ADENOMAS: EARLY SURGICAL RESULTS IN 200 PATIENTS AND COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS MICROSURGICAL SERIES

Dehdashti, Amir R., Ganna, Ahmed, Karabatsou, Konstantina, Gentili, Fred·2008·Neurosurgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the results of a consecutive series of patients undergoing pituitary surgery using a pure endoscopic endonasal approach and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed 200 consecutive patients with pituitary adenoma who underwent purely endoscopic transsphenoidal resection of their lesions. The patients' clinical outcomes, including remission rates, degrees of tumor removal, and complications, were evaluated and compared with a previous microscopic series. RESULTS: There were 111 nonfunctioning adenomas and 34 growth hormone-secreting, 27 adrenocorticotropin hormone-secreting, 25 prolactin-secreting, and 3 thyroid-stimulating hormone-secreting adenomas. The degree of gross total removal for tumors with suprasellar or parasellar extension and without cavernous sinus involvement was 96% and for intrasellar lesions was 98%. After a median follow-up period of 19 months, the remission results for patients with functioning adenomas were 71% for growth hormone-secreting, 81% for adrenocorticotropin hormone-secreting, and 88% for prolactin-secreting adenomas, with no recurrence at the time of the last follow-up. This compares with similar results reported from series using a standard microsurgical approach (growth hormone-secreting adenomas, 67%; adrenocorticotropin hormone-secreting adenomas, 78%; and prolactin-secreting adenomas, 62%). Endoscopic surgery for recurrent or residual nonfunctioning adenomas that had been previously treated using a microscopic approach revealed in the majority of cases a more limited exposure during the initial surgery, frequently with incomplete tumor removal. Complication rates have been low, and the average length of hospital stay was reduced. CONCLUSION: A purely endoscopic approach for pituitary adenoma treatment is a safe and effective alternative to the traditional microscopic procedure. Although our results reveal excellent tumor-removal rates, comparable remission rates in functioning tumors, and a very low rate of complications, additional studies with longer follow-up periods are required to confirm whether this approach should be considered the preferred procedure for pituitary surgery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1227/01.neu.0000297072.75304.89

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 408

Metadata

Authors
Dehdashti, A. R., Ganna, A., Karabatsou, K., & Gentili, F.
Venue
Neurosurgery
Published
2008-05
Volume
62
Issue
5
Pages
1006-1017
ISSN
0148-396X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2052113417
Cited by
408
References
27
FWCI
14.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: PURE ENDOSCOPIC ENDONASAL APPROACH FOR PITUITARY ADENOMAS: EARLY SURGICAL RESULTS IN 200 PATIENTS AND COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS MICROSURGICAL SERIES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1227/01.neu.0000297072.75304.89
The paper
Dehdashti, A. R., Ganna, A., Karabatsou, K., & Gentili, F. (2008). PURE ENDOSCOPIC ENDONASAL APPROACH FOR PITUITARY ADENOMAS: EARLY SURGICAL RESULTS IN 200 PATIENTS AND COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS MICROSURGICAL SERIES. Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000297072.75304.89

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.