Combined Petrosal Intertentorial Approach: A Cadaveric Study of Comparison With the Standard Combined Petrosectomy

Background and objectives: The combined petrosal intertentorial approach (CPIA) has been proposed as an alternative to standard combined petrosal approach (SCPA). CPIA has been designed to maintain integrity of the temporal dura with a view to reduce temporal lobe morbidity and venous complications. This study has been designed to perform a quantitative comparison between these approaches. Methods: Five human specimens were used for this study. CPIA was performed on one side and SCPA on the opposite side. The area of exposure (petroclival and brainstem), surgical freedom, and angles of attack to a predefined target were measured and compared. Results: SCPA provided a significantly larger petroclival area of exposure (6.81 ± 0.60 cm2) over the CPIA (5.59 ± 0.59 cm2), P = .012. The area of brainstem exposed with SCPA was greater than with CPIA (7.17 ± 0.84 vs 5.63 ± 0.72, P = .014). The area of surgical freedom was greater in SCPA rather than in CPIA (8.59 ± 0.55 and 7.13 ± 0.96 cm2, respectively, P = .019). There was no significative difference between CPIA and SCPA in the vertical angles of attack for the Meckel cave, Dorello canal, and root entry zone of cranial nerve VII. Conversely, the horizontal angles of attack permitted by the CPIA were significantly smaller for the Meckel cave (52.36° ± 5.01° vs 64.4° ± 5.3°, P = .006) and root entry zone of cranial nerve VII (30.7° ± 4.4° vs 40.1° ± 6.2°, P = .025). Conclusion: CPIA is associated with a reduction in terms of the area of surgical freedom (22%), skull base (18%), brainstem exposure (17%), and horizontal angles of attack (18%-23%) when compared with SCPA. This loss in terms of exposure is counterbalanced by the advantage of keeping the temporal lobe covered by an extra layer of meningeal tissue, thus possibly reducing the risk of temporal lobe injury and venous infarction. These results need to be validated with adequate clinical experience.