Baig Mirza Asfand, Fayez Feras, Georgiannakis Ariadni, Olszewska Emilia, Olszewska Natalia, Del Duca Davide, Vastani Amisha, Syrris Christoforos, Pollock Jonathan
1Department of Neurosurgery, Queen's Hospital Romford, Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Essex, United Kingdom.
2Department of Neurosurgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Neurosurg Focus. 2025 Sep 1;59(3):E16. doi: 10.3171/2025.6.FOCUS25438.
This study aimed to compare pain outcomes and complication rates between reexploration microvascular decompression (MVD), percutaneous rhizotomy (PR), and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) as second-line treatments for recurrent or persistent trigeminal neuralgia (TN) following an initial MVD.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and MOOSE (Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported outcomes of reexploration MVD, PR, or SRS in adult patients with classic or idiopathic TN after a failed initial MVD. Primary outcomes included early and long-term pain relief. Secondary outcomes included recurrence, facial numbness, and complications. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted.
Twenty-seven studies including 886 patients were analyzed (MVD + MVD: 505; MVD + PR: 267; MVD + SRS: 114). Early pain relief rates were similar between the MVD + MVD (83%) and MVD + PR (88%) groups, but lower in the MVD + SRS (76%) group. Long-term pain relief was highest in the MVD + MVD (82%) group, followed by the MVD + PR (68%) and MVD + SRS (67%) groups. New facial numbness occurred most frequently in the MVD + PR (93%) group, compared with the MVD + MVD (29%) and MVD + SRS (12%) groups. Neurolysis during reexploration was associated with significantly improved pain outcomes (OR 4.0, p = 0.00017). No clinical variables significantly predicted early pain relief.
Reexploration MVD provides durable long-term pain relief but carries a risk of complications. PR offers comparable short-term efficacy with higher rates of sensory disturbance but lower surgical morbidity. The benefit of nerve manipulation even in the absence of neurovascular compression highlights the need to better understand the pathophysiology of recurrent TN and supports the necessity for randomized controlled trials to inform treatment algorithms.
本研究旨在比较再次微血管减压术(MVD)、经皮神经根切断术(PR)和立体定向放射外科手术(SRS)作为初次MVD术后复发或持续性三叉神经痛(TN)二线治疗方法的疼痛结局和并发症发生率。
根据PRISMA(系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目)和MOOSE(流行病学观察性研究的Meta分析)指南进行系统评价和Meta分析。纳入报告初次MVD失败后成年典型或特发性TN患者再次MVD、PR或SRS结局的研究。主要结局包括早期和长期疼痛缓解。次要结局包括复发、面部麻木和并发症。采用随机效应模型进行Meta分析,并进行亚组和敏感性分析。
分析了27项研究,共886例患者(MVD+MVD:505例;MVD+PR:267例;MVD+SRS:114例)。MVD+MVD组(83%)和MVD+PR组(88%)的早期疼痛缓解率相似,但MVD+SRS组(76%)较低。长期疼痛缓解率最高的是MVD+MVD组(82%),其次是MVD+PR组(68%)和MVD+SRS组(67%)。与MVD+MVD组(29%)和MVD+SRS组(12%)相比,MVD+PR组(93%)新发生面部麻木的频率最高。再次手术时的神经松解与疼痛结局显著改善相关(OR 4.0,p=0.00017)。没有临床变量能显著预测早期疼痛缓解。
再次MVD可提供持久的长期疼痛缓解,但有并发症风险。PR具有可比的短期疗效,感觉障碍发生率较高,但手术并发症发生率较低。即使在没有神经血管压迫的情况下进行神经操作的益处,凸显了更好地理解复发性TN病理生理学的必要性,并支持进行随机对照试验以指导治疗方案的必要性。