Neurosurgery 97:16–27, 2025
This systematic review of 19,437 patients compares transposition and interposition microvascular decompression techniques for hemifacial spasm. Both methods show similar efficacy and safety, with no conclusive evidence favoring one. Slightly higher facial nerve weakness was noted with transposition. Prospective trials are needed for definitive comparison.
Hemifacial spasm (HFS) is a rare disorder caused by compression of the facial nerve, leading to involuntary facial muscle contractions.
• Microvascular decompression (MVD) is an effective surgical treatment for HFS, with two main techniques: interposition (placing a prosthesis between nerve and vessel) and transposition (moving the vessel away without direct prosthesis contact).
• A systematic review of 62 studies (19,437 patients) compared outcomes of interposition (18,627 cases) and transposition (810 cases) in MVD for HFS.
• Spasm freedom rates were similar: 90.4% for transposition and 89.6% for interposition.
• Complication rates were similar, though temporary facial nerve weakness/palsy was higher with transposition (9.52% vs 6.03%).
• No conclusive evidence was found that one technique is superior in safety or efficacy; interposition may be preferred in certain clinical situations.
• A prospective trial is needed to determine true differences and optimal indications for each technique.
• The review highlights the need for future studies to stratify outcomes by technique and report prognostic factors.












You must be logged in to post a comment.