Endoscopic Endonasal Transsphenoidal Resection of Pituitary Adenomas in Patients Presenting With Monocular Blindness

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Suprasellar tumors, particularly pituitary adenomas (PAs), commonly present with visual decline, and the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach (EETA) is the primary management for optic apparatus decompression. Patients presenting with complete preoperative monocular blindness comprise a high-risk subgroup, given concern for complete blindness. This retrospective cohort study evaluates outcomes after EETA for patients with PA presenting with monocular blindness. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all EETA cases at our institution from June 2012 to August 2023 was performed. Inclusion criteria included adults with confirmed PA and complete monocular blindness, defined as no light perception, and a relative afferent pupillary defect secondary to tumor mass effect. RESULTS: Our cohort includes 15 patients (9 males, 6 females), comprising 2.4% of the overall PA cohort screened. The mean tumor diameter was 3.8 cm, with 6 being giant PAs (>4 cm). The mean duration of preoperative monocular blindness was 568 days. Additional symptoms included contralateral visual field defects (n = 11) and headaches (n = 10). Two patients presented with subacute PA apoplexy. Gross total resection was achieved in 46% of patients, reflecting tumor size and invasiveness. Postoperatively, 2 patients experienced improvement in their effectively blind eye and 2 had improved visual fields of the contralateral eye. Those with improvements were operated within 10 days of presentation, and no patients experienced worsened vision. CONCLUSION: This is the first series of EETA outcomes in patients with higher-risk PA with monocular blindness on presentation. In these extensive lesions, vision remained stable for most without further decline and improvement from monocular blindness was observed in a small subset of patients with no light perception and relative afferent pupillary defect. Timing from vision loss to surgical intervention seemed to be associated with improvement. From a surgical perspective, caution is warranted to protect remaining vision and we conclude that EETA is safe in the management of these patients.