Microscopic versus endoscopic pituitary surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE The endoscopic techniques used in pituitary surgery have evolved greatly in recent years. Our objective in this study was to conduct a review of the systematic reviews published in the English language literature, to examine their consistency and conclusions reached following studies comparing microsurgery and endoscopic surgery in hypophyseal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS We carried out a bibliographic search on MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases, selecting those systematic reviews and meta-analyses published from the year 2000 until January 2013, focusing on comparisons between microsurgical and endoscopic techniques. RESULTS We concluded with type A consistency that hospital stay was shorter and diabetes insipidus and rhinological complications were less frequent in the endoscopy group. We concluded with type B consistency that lower rates of patient blood loss, shorter operative times, higher rate of gross total resection, lesser association to visual impairment and lower rate of hypopituitarism were observed in the endoscopy group. Vascular complications and cerebrospinal fluid fistulas were reduced with microsurgery. It is crucial to perform a combined analysis of all the systematic reviews treating a specific topic, observing and analysing the trends and how these are affected by new contributions. CONCLUSION Randomized multicenter studies are necessary to resolve the controversy over endoscopic and microsurgical approaches in hypophyseal pathology.