Abstract
Introduction Trigeminal neuralgia remains a challenging disease with significant debilitating symptoms and variable efficacy in terms of treatment options, namely microvascular decompression (MVD), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), and percutaneous rhizotomy. Internal neurolysis (IN) is an alternative treatment that may be provide patient benefit but has limited understanding. We performed a systematic review of IN treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.
Methods Studies from 2000 to 2021 that assessed IN in trigeminal neuralgia were aggregated and independently reviewed. Weighted averages for demographics, outcomes and complications were generated.
Results A total of 520 patients in 12 studies were identified with 384 who underwent IN (mean age 53.8 years, range 46-61.4 years). A mean follow-up time of 36.5 months (range 12-90 months) was seen. Preoperative symptoms were present for about 55.0 months before treatment and pain was predominantly in V2/3 (26.8%) followed by other distributions. An excellent to good outcome (Barrow Neurological Institute Pain Score [BNI-PS] I-III) was seen in 83.7% of patients (range 72-93.8%). Pain outcomes at 1 year were excellent in 58-78.4%, good or better in 77-93.75% and fair or better in 80-93.75% of patients. On average facial numbness following IN was seen in 96% of patients however at follow-up remained in only 1.75-10%. The vast majority of remaining numbness was not significantly distressing to patients. Subgroup comparisons of IN vs. recurrent MVD, IN vs. radiofrequency ablation, the impact of IN during the absence of vascular compression as well as IN with and without MVD were also evaluated.
Conclusions IN represents a promising approach for surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia in the absence of vascular compression or in potential cases of recurrence. Complications were limited in general. Further study is required to evaluate the impact of IN via higher quality prospective studies.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received for this study
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB excemption, review paper
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data are available in the primary papers from where this review was acquired.
