Internal neurolysis versus intraoperative glycerin rhizotomy for trigeminal neuralgia

J Neurosurg 138:270–275, 2023

Internal neurolysis (IN) and intraoperative glycerin rhizotomy (ioGR) are emerging surgical options for patients with trigeminal neuralgia without neurovascular contact. The objective of this study was to compare the neurological outcomes of patients who underwent IN with those of patients who underwent ioGR.

METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent IN or ioGR for trigeminal neuralgia at our institution. Patient demographic characteristics and immediate postoperative outcomes, as well as long-term neurological outcomes, were compared.

RESULTS Of 1044 patients who underwent open surgical treatment for trigeminal neuralgia, 56 patients underwent IN and 91 underwent ioGR. Of these 147 patients, 37 had no evidence of intraoperative neurovascular conflict. All patients who underwent IN and 96.7% of patients who underwent ioGR had immediate postoperative pain relief. At last followup, patients who underwent IN had lower Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain intensity scores (p = 0.05), better BNI facial numbness scores (p < 0.01), and a greater degree of pain improvement (p = 0.05) compared with those who underwent ioGR. Patients who underwent IN also had significantly lower rates of symptomatic pain recurrence (p < 0.01) at last follow-up over an average of 9.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS IN appears to provide patients with a greater degree of pain relief, lower rates of facial numbness, and lower rates of pain recurrence compared with ioGR. Future prospective studies will better characterize long-term pain recurrence and outcomes.

 

Microsurgery versus Microsurgery With Preoperative Embolization for Brain Arteriovenous Malformation Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Neurosurgery 92:27–41, 2023

Preoperative embolization has traditionally been regarded as a safe and effective adjunct to microsurgical treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations (bAVM). However, there is currently no high-level evidence to ascertain this presumption.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of microsurgery (MS) vs microsurgery with preoperative embolization (E + MS) in patients with bAVM through systematic review.

METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, and Embase. The primary outcome was bAVM obliteration. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative bleeding (mL), complications, worsened modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and mortality. The pooled proportions of outcomes were calculated through the logit transformation method. The odds ratio (OR) of categorical data and mean difference of continuous data were estimated through the Mantel-Haenszel and the inverse variance methods, respectively.

RESULTS: Thirty-two studies met the eligibility criteria. One thousand eight hundred twenty-eight patients were treated by microsurgery alone, and 1088 were treated by microsurgery with preoperative embolization, respectively. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in AVM obliteration (94.1% vs 95.6%, OR = 1.15 [0.63-2.11], P = .65), mortality (1.7% vs 2%, OR = 0.88 [0.30-2.58], P = .82), procedural complications (18.2% vs 27.2%, OR = 0.47 [0.19-1.17], P = .10), worsened mRS (21.2% vs 18.5%, OR = 1.08 [0.33-3.54], P = .9), and intraoperative blood loss (mean difference = 182.89 [À87.76, 453.55], P = .19).

CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in AVM obliteration, mortality, complications, worse mRS, and intraoperative blood loss between MS and E + MS groups. For AVMs where MS alone has acceptable results, it is reasonable to bypass unnecessary preoperative embolization given higher postoperative complication risk.