介入与“非接触”转位微血管减压入路治疗三叉神经痛的疗效比较。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Anthony T Lee, Ramin A Morshed, Sravani Kondapavulur, David J Caldwell, Noah Nichols, Genevieve Smith, Albert Wang, Mariann Ward, Maggie W Waung, Ethan Winkler, Edward F Chang
{"title":"介入与“非接触”转位微血管减压入路治疗三叉神经痛的疗效比较。","authors":"Anthony T Lee, Ramin A Morshed, Sravani Kondapavulur, David J Caldwell, Noah Nichols, Genevieve Smith, Albert Wang, Mariann Ward, Maggie W Waung, Ethan Winkler, Edward F Chang","doi":"10.3171/2025.2.JNS241831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Microvascular decompression (MVD) is an effective method of treating trigeminal neuralgia (TN). The traditional approach is an interposition technique in which Teflon is placed between the nerve and offending vessel. However, recurrent TN pain has been attributed to the Teflon itself, its migration, inflammatory granuloma formation, or continued direct compression. Thus, transposition techniques in which the nerve is fully decompressed without any contact with the offending vessel or the Teflon have been described. In this study, the authors report their institutional experience with interposition and newer transposition techniques such as sling transposition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had undergone MVD from July 2015 to March 2024. Demographic, surgical, and clinical variables were collected, including modified Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain intensity scale scores. Clinical outcomes were assessed using univariate and multivariate regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize inherent heterogeneity in the surgical cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred five patients underwent MVD for TN. Eighty-four patients underwent interposition; 139, transposition with Teflon (full decompression with no contact to the nerve); and 48, transposition using a pericranium sling to the tentorium. A subset of these patients underwent concurrent rhizotomy: 73% interposition cases, 15% Teflon transposition cases, 4% sling transposition cases. Rhizotomy alone was performed in 34 patients. Transposition primarily involved the superior cerebellar artery (90%) and was associated with severe compression and nerve indentation. There were no differences in BNI scores at the last follow-up or in complications among the treatment groups. The only significant predictor of pain freedom on multivariate analysis was MRI demonstrating clear compression (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.147-5.404, p = 0.021). However, subgroup analyses of patients with at least 1 year of follow-up showed a trend for increased pain freedom (BNI scores I and IIIa) with the sling transposition technique at 1 year, which was statistically significant at the 2-year follow-up (1 year: sling 96.6%, Teflon 86.9%, interposition 81.1%, p = 0.053; 2 years: sling 100%, Teflon 87.5%, interposition 77.5%, p = 0.049). PSM cohort analysis showed that sling transposition patients had higher rates of pain-free outcomes (BNI scores I and IIIa) at the last follow-up than the Teflon transposition patients (93.1% vs 62.1%, respectively, p = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interposition and transposition techniques for MVD are both effective. The authors' midterm data suggest longer-term TN pain control with sling transposition. Further studies will need to confirm the durability of long-term pain freedom.</p>","PeriodicalId":16505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcome comparison between interposition and \\\"contactless\\\" transposition microvascular decompression approaches for trigeminal neuralgia.\",\"authors\":\"Anthony T Lee, Ramin A Morshed, Sravani Kondapavulur, David J Caldwell, Noah Nichols, Genevieve Smith, Albert Wang, Mariann Ward, Maggie W Waung, Ethan Winkler, Edward F Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.3171/2025.2.JNS241831\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Microvascular decompression (MVD) is an effective method of treating trigeminal neuralgia (TN). The traditional approach is an interposition technique in which Teflon is placed between the nerve and offending vessel. However, recurrent TN pain has been attributed to the Teflon itself, its migration, inflammatory granuloma formation, or continued direct compression. Thus, transposition techniques in which the nerve is fully decompressed without any contact with the offending vessel or the Teflon have been described. In this study, the authors report their institutional experience with interposition and newer transposition techniques such as sling transposition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had undergone MVD from July 2015 to March 2024. Demographic, surgical, and clinical variables were collected, including modified Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain intensity scale scores. Clinical outcomes were assessed using univariate and multivariate regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize inherent heterogeneity in the surgical cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred five patients underwent MVD for TN. Eighty-four patients underwent interposition; 139, transposition with Teflon (full decompression with no contact to the nerve); and 48, transposition using a pericranium sling to the tentorium. A subset of these patients underwent concurrent rhizotomy: 73% interposition cases, 15% Teflon transposition cases, 4% sling transposition cases. Rhizotomy alone was performed in 34 patients. Transposition primarily involved the superior cerebellar artery (90%) and was associated with severe compression and nerve indentation. There were no differences in BNI scores at the last follow-up or in complications among the treatment groups. The only significant predictor of pain freedom on multivariate analysis was MRI demonstrating clear compression (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.147-5.404, p = 0.021). However, subgroup analyses of patients with at least 1 year of follow-up showed a trend for increased pain freedom (BNI scores I and IIIa) with the sling transposition technique at 1 year, which was statistically significant at the 2-year follow-up (1 year: sling 96.6%, Teflon 86.9%, interposition 81.1%, p = 0.053; 2 years: sling 100%, Teflon 87.5%, interposition 77.5%, p = 0.049). PSM cohort analysis showed that sling transposition patients had higher rates of pain-free outcomes (BNI scores I and IIIa) at the last follow-up than the Teflon transposition patients (93.1% vs 62.1%, respectively, p = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interposition and transposition techniques for MVD are both effective. The authors' midterm data suggest longer-term TN pain control with sling transposition. Further studies will need to confirm the durability of long-term pain freedom.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.2.JNS241831\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.2.JNS241831","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:微血管减压术(MVD)是治疗三叉神经痛的有效方法。传统的方法是将聚四氟乙烯置于神经和犯罪血管之间的介入技术。然而,复发性TN疼痛可归因于特氟龙本身、其迁移、炎性肉芽肿形成或持续的直接压迫。因此,已经描述了神经完全减压而不与侵犯血管或聚四氟乙烯接触的转位技术。在这项研究中,作者报告了他们的机构经验,插入和较新的换位技术,如吊索换位。方法:对2015年7月至2024年3月接受MVD治疗的患者进行回顾性图表分析。收集了人口统计学、外科和临床变量,包括修改的Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI)疼痛强度量表评分。临床结果采用单因素和多因素回归进行评估,并采用倾向评分匹配(PSM)来减少手术队列中固有的异质性。结果:35例患者因TN行MVD治疗,84例行介入治疗;139,聚四氟乙烯转位(完全减压,不接触神经);第48步,用包骨吊索吊起幕。这些患者中的一部分接受了并发根切断术:73%的插入病例,15%的特氟隆转位病例,4%的吊带转位病例。34例患者单独行根切断术。移位主要累及小脑上动脉(90%),并伴有严重压迫和神经压痕。在最后一次随访时,治疗组的BNI评分和并发症没有差异。多变量分析中疼痛缓解的唯一显著预测因子是MRI显示明显的压迫(OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.147-5.404, p = 0.021)。然而,随访至少1年的患者亚组分析显示,使用吊带移位技术后1年疼痛自由度(BNI评分I和IIIa)有增加的趋势,2年随访时差异有统计学意义(1年:吊带96.6%,特氟龙86.9%,间置81.1%,p = 0.053;2年:吊带100%,特氟龙87.5%,间接物77.5%,p = 0.049)。PSM队列分析显示,在最后一次随访时,吊带移位患者的无痛结局率(BNI评分为I和IIIa)高于特氟隆移位患者(分别为93.1%对62.1%,p = 0.003)。结论:MVD的介入和转位技术都是有效的。作者的中期数据表明,吊带移位对TN疼痛的长期控制。进一步的研究将需要确认长期疼痛消除的持久性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outcome comparison between interposition and "contactless" transposition microvascular decompression approaches for trigeminal neuralgia.

Objective: Microvascular decompression (MVD) is an effective method of treating trigeminal neuralgia (TN). The traditional approach is an interposition technique in which Teflon is placed between the nerve and offending vessel. However, recurrent TN pain has been attributed to the Teflon itself, its migration, inflammatory granuloma formation, or continued direct compression. Thus, transposition techniques in which the nerve is fully decompressed without any contact with the offending vessel or the Teflon have been described. In this study, the authors report their institutional experience with interposition and newer transposition techniques such as sling transposition.

Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who had undergone MVD from July 2015 to March 2024. Demographic, surgical, and clinical variables were collected, including modified Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain intensity scale scores. Clinical outcomes were assessed using univariate and multivariate regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize inherent heterogeneity in the surgical cohorts.

Results: Three hundred five patients underwent MVD for TN. Eighty-four patients underwent interposition; 139, transposition with Teflon (full decompression with no contact to the nerve); and 48, transposition using a pericranium sling to the tentorium. A subset of these patients underwent concurrent rhizotomy: 73% interposition cases, 15% Teflon transposition cases, 4% sling transposition cases. Rhizotomy alone was performed in 34 patients. Transposition primarily involved the superior cerebellar artery (90%) and was associated with severe compression and nerve indentation. There were no differences in BNI scores at the last follow-up or in complications among the treatment groups. The only significant predictor of pain freedom on multivariate analysis was MRI demonstrating clear compression (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.147-5.404, p = 0.021). However, subgroup analyses of patients with at least 1 year of follow-up showed a trend for increased pain freedom (BNI scores I and IIIa) with the sling transposition technique at 1 year, which was statistically significant at the 2-year follow-up (1 year: sling 96.6%, Teflon 86.9%, interposition 81.1%, p = 0.053; 2 years: sling 100%, Teflon 87.5%, interposition 77.5%, p = 0.049). PSM cohort analysis showed that sling transposition patients had higher rates of pain-free outcomes (BNI scores I and IIIa) at the last follow-up than the Teflon transposition patients (93.1% vs 62.1%, respectively, p = 0.003).

Conclusions: Interposition and transposition techniques for MVD are both effective. The authors' midterm data suggest longer-term TN pain control with sling transposition. Further studies will need to confirm the durability of long-term pain freedom.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgery
Journal of neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1003
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, and Neurosurgical Focus are devoted to the publication of original works relating primarily to neurosurgery, including studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology. The Editors and Editorial Boards encourage submission of clinical and laboratory studies. Other manuscripts accepted for review include technical notes on instruments or equipment that are innovative or useful to clinicians and researchers in the field of neuroscience; papers describing unusual cases; manuscripts on historical persons or events related to neurosurgery; and in Neurosurgical Focus, occasional reviews. Letters to the Editor commenting on articles recently published in the Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信