Reported outcomes in transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas: a systematic review

PurposeTranssphenoidal surgery is an established treatment for pituitary adenomas. We examined outcomes and time points following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma to identify reporting heterogeneity within the literature.MethodsA systematic review of studies that reported outcomes for transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma 1990-2021 were examined. The protocol was registered a priori and adhered to the PRISMA statement. Studies in English with > 10 patients (prospective) or > 500 patients (retrospective) were included.Results178 studies comprising 427,659 patients were included. 91 studies reported 2 or more adenoma pathologies within the same study; 53 studies reported a single pathology. The most common adenomas reported were growth hormone-secreting (n = 106), non-functioning (n = 101), and ACTH-secreting (n = 95); 27 studies did not state a pathology. Surgical complications were the most reported outcome (n = 116, 65%). Other domains included endocrine (n = 104, 58%), extent of resection (n = 81, 46%), ophthalmic (n = 66, 37%), recurrence (n = 49, 28%), quality of life (n = 25, 19%); and nasal (n = 18, 10%). Defined follow up time points were most reported for endocrine (n = 56, 31%), extent of resection (n = 39, 22%), and recurrence (n = 28, 17%). There was heterogeneity in the follow up reported for all outcomes at different time points: discharge (n = 9), < 30 days (n = 23), < 6 months (n = 64), < 1 year (n = 23), and > 1 year (n = 69).ConclusionOutcomes and follow up reported for transsphenoidal surgical resection of pituitary adenoma are heterogenous over the last 30 years. This study highlights the necessity to develop a robust, consensus-based, minimum, core outcome set. The next step is to develop a Delphi survey of essential outcomes, followed by a consensus meeting of interdisciplinary experts. Patient representatives should also be included. An agreed core outcome set will enable homogeneous reporting and meaningful research synthesis, ultimately improving patient care.