Botulinum Toxin Injection for Hemifacial Spasm and Benign Essential Blepharospasm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Pretarsal and Preseptal Injection Techniques.

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of pretarsal versus preseptal botulinum toxin injection techniques for patients with benign essential blepharospasm (BEB) and hemifacial spasm (HFS).

METHODS

The study was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023479251). A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and an electronic search was conducted to identify all studies comparing outcomes between the two techniques. Change in Jankovic Rating Scale (JRS) was the primary outcome. Adverse events, duration to maximum response, and latency to first response were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 384 patients with 2657 injections for HFS patients and 1033 injections for BEB patients were reported across six studies. The mean difference analysis for the change in JRS scores in HFS patients reveals a statistically significant difference favouring the pretarsal group for improved JRS ratings (MD=0.47, CI= 0.19 to 0.75, P = 0.001) and change in JRS scores in BEB patients favouring the pretarsal group (MD=0.92, CI= 0.48 to 1.36, P 0.001). There was a significant difference favouring the pretarsal group in duration of maximum response in HFS (P= 0.0005) and fewer occurrences of ptosis (P=0.0009). Other secondary outcomes including post-procedure tearing, irritation, and lagophthalmos had similar results.

CONCLUSION

Pretarsal botulinum toxin injection is a preferable alternative for BEB and HFS compared to the preseptal approach, because it minimizes the extent and frequency of spasms, has less occurrences of ptosis, and has a greater duration of maximal response. More clinical trials are needed to validate the findings of this meta-analysis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors   www.springer.com/00266 .