Joanna M. Zakrzewska

AAN-EFNS guidelines on trigeminal neuralgia management.

Several issues regarding diagnosis, pharmacological treatment, and surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) are still unsettled. The American Academy of Neurology and the European Federation of Neurological Societies launched a joint Task Force to prepare general guidelines for the management of this condition. After systematic review of the literature the Task Force came to a series of evidence‐based recommendations. In patients with TN MRI may be considered to identify patients with structural causes. The presence of trigeminal sensory deficits, bilateral involvement, and abnormal trigeminal reflexes should be considered useful to disclose symptomatic TN, whereas younger age of onset, involvement of the first division, unresponsiveness to treatment and abnormal trigeminal evoked potentials are not useful in distinguishing symptomatic from classic TN. Carbamazepine (stronger evidence) or oxcarbazepine (better tolerability) should be offered as first‐line treatment for pain control. For patients with TN refractory to medical therapy early surgical therapy may be considered. Gasserian ganglion percutaneous techniques, gamma knife and microvascular decompression may be considered. Microvascular decompression may be considered over other surgical techniques to provide the longest duration of pain freedom. The role of surgery versus pharmacotherapy in the management of TN in patients with multiple sclerosis remains uncertain.

Practice Parameter: The diagnostic evaluation and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (an evidence-based review): Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the European Federation of Neurological Societies

Background: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a common cause of facial pain. Purpose: To answer the following questions: 1) In patients with TN, how often does routine neuroimaging (CT, MRI) identify a cause? 2) Which features identify patients at increased risk for symptomatic TN (STN; i.e., a structural cause such as a tumor)? 3) Does high-resolution MRI accurately identify patients with neurovascular compression? 4) Which drugs effectively treat classic and symptomatic trigeminal neuralgia? 5) When should surgery be offered? 6) Which surgical technique gives the longest pain-free period with the fewest complications and good quality of life? Methods: Systematic review of the literature by a panel of experts. Conclusions: In patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN), routine head imaging identifies structural causes in up to 15% of patients and may be considered useful (Level C). Trigeminal sensory deficits, bilateral involvement of the trigeminal nerve, and abnormal trigeminal reflexes are associated with an increased risk of symptomatic TN (STN) and should be considered useful in distinguishing STN from classic trigeminal neuralgia (Level B). There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the usefulness of MRI to identify neurovascular compression of the trigeminal nerve (Level U). Carbamazepine (Level A) or oxcarbazepine (Level B) should be offered for pain control while baclofen and lamotrigine (Level C) may be considered useful. For patients with TN refractory to medical therapy, Gasserian ganglion percutaneous techniques, gamma knife, and microvascular decompression may be considered (Level C). The role of surgery vs pharmacotherapy in the management of TN in patients with MS remains uncertain.

Lamotrigine (lamictal) in refractory trigeminal neuralgia: results from a double-blind placebo controlled crossover trial.

&NA; Lamotrigine is a chemically novel antiepileptic drug which has not been adequately assessed for its antineuralgic properties. It was used in a double‐blind placebo controlled crossover trial in 14 patients with refractory trigeminal neuralgia. Patients continued to take a steady dose of carbamazepine or phenytoin throughout the trial over a 31‐day period. Each arm of the trial lasted 2 weeks with an intervening 3‐day washout period. The maintenance dose of lamotrigine was 400 mg. Lamotrigine was superior to placebo (P=0.011) based on analysis of a composite efficacy index which compared the numbers of patients assigned greater efficacy on lamotrigine with those assigned greater efficacy on placebo. Efficacy for one treatment over another was determined according to a hierarchy of: (i) use of escape medication; (ii) total pain scores; or (iii) global evaluations. Eleven of the 13 patients eligible for inclusion in the composite efficacy index showed better efficacy on lamotrigine compared with placebo. Global evaluations further suggested that patients did better on lamotrigine than placebo (P=0.025). The adverse reactions with both lamotrigine and placebo were predominantly dose‐dependent effects on the central nervous system. A 14th patient withdrew from the study due to severe pain during the placebo arm of the trial. It would appear that lamotrigine has antineuralgic properties.

Systematic review of ablative neurosurgical techniques for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.

OBJECTIVEThere are no randomized controlled trials comparing retrogasserian percutaneous radiofrequency thermocoagulation, glycerol rhizolysis, balloon compression of the gasserian ganglion, and stereotactic radiosurgery, nor are there systematic reviews using predefined quality criteria. The objective of this study was to systematically identify all of the studies reporting outcomes and complications of ablative techniques for treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, from the development of electronic databases, and to evaluate them with predefined quality criteria. METHODSInclusion criteria for the outcome analysis included thorough demographic documentation, defined diagnostic and outcome criteria, a minimum of 30 patients treated and median/mean follow-up times of 12 months, not more than 20% of patients lost to follow-up monitoring, Kaplan-Meier actuarial analysis of individual procedures, less than 10% of patients retreated because of failure or early recurrence, and a minimal dose of 70 Gy for stereotactic radiosurgery. High-quality studies with no actuarial analysis were used for the evaluation of complications. RESULTSOf 175 studies identified, 9 could be used to evaluate rates of complete pain relief on a yearly basis and 22 could be used to evaluate complications. In mixed series, radiofrequency thermocoagulation offered higher rates of complete pain relief, compared with glycerol rhizolysis and stereotactic radiosurgery, although it demonstrated the greatest number of complications. CONCLUSIONRadiofrequency thermocoagulation offers the highest rates of complete pain relief, although further data on balloon microcompression are required. It is essential that uniform outcome measures and actuarial methods be universally adopted for the reporting of surgical results. Randomized controlled trials are required to reliably evaluate new surgical techniques.

Patient Reports of Satisfaction after Microvascular Decompression and Partial Sensory Rhizotomy for Trigeminal Neuralgia

OBJECTIVE: There are no reports of patient satisfaction surveys after either a microvascular decompression (MVD) or a partial sensory rhizotomy (PSR) for trigeminal neuralgia. This study compares patient satisfaction after these two types of posterior fossa surgery for trigeminal neuralgia, because it is postulated that recurrences, complications, and previous surgical experience reduce satisfaction. METHODS: All patients who had undergone their first posterior fossa surgery at one center were sent a self-complete questionnaire by an independent physician. Among the 44 questions on four standardized questionnaires were 5 questions that related to patient satisfaction and experience of obtaining care. Patients were divided into those having their first surgical procedure (primary) and those who had had previous ablative surgery (nonprimary). RESULTS: Response rates were 90% (220 of 245) of MVD and 88% (53 of 60) of PSR patients. Groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, duration of symptoms, mean duration of follow-up, and recurrence rates. Overall satisfaction with their current situation was 89% in MVD and 72% in PSR patients. Unsatisfied with the outcome were 4% of MVD and 20% of PSR patients, and this is a significant difference (P < 0.01). Satisfaction with outcome was higher in those undergoing this as a primary procedure. In the primary group, satisfaction was dependent on recurrence and complication/side effects status (each P < 0.01), but this was not the case in the nonprimary group. Patients expressed a desire for earlier posterior fossa surgery in 73% of MVD and 58% of PSR patients, and this was highest in the primary group. The final outcome was considered to be better than expected in 80% of MVD and 54% of PSR patients, but 22% of the PSR group (P < 0.01) thought they were worse off. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing posterior fossa surgery as a primary procedure are most satisfied and PSR patients are least satisfied, partly because of a higher rate of side effects.

QUALITY OF REPORTING IN EVALUATIONS OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF TRIGEMINAL NEURALGIA: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE REPORTS

OBJECTIVEThere are numerous reports on the surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, but the studies do not use uniform outcome measures, which makes it difficult for patients and clinicians to determine which treatment may be most appropriate. The objectives of this study were to set quality criteria and standards for outcome reporting for the surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (on the basis of international expert opinion), to identify and assess all studies of the surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia and evaluate the studies against those criteria, and to provide recommendations for submitting reports on the outcomes of surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. METHODSThe types of data that 11 neurosurgeons and 2 neurologists considered essential for articles reporting the outcomes of surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia were the quality criteria used by the two authors. Standards were established in terms of the minimal number and type of criteria that studies should meet to allow their use in a potential systematic review of pain outcomes of surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. Studies were identified in MEDLINE searches and from other sources and were independently scored against those criteria by the two authors. The reproducibility of the method was checked with assessments of inter- and intra-rater reliability. A checklist for the reporting of studies was formulated. RESULTSA total of 281 studies were identified, of which 222 were scored. Seventy-one (32%) of the studies reached the minimal set standards, but only 28 (13%) could be used for assessment of pain outcomes, because they included actuarial analyses. There was good agreement between the two authors in the scoring of the studies, although some criteria required stricter definitions. A checklist for the reporting of future studies on the surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia was proposed. CONCLUSIONWhen assessed against the proposed criteria and standards, the quality of reporting was generally poor. The methods for reporting surgical outcomes for trigeminal neuralgia were not uniform; therefore, the comparability of results and techniques was low. Data should be collected and reported in a standardized way. A protocol for data collection and reporting on the surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia has been proposed. Further research is needed to evaluate this tool.

Evidence-based approach to the medical management of trigeminal neuralgia

Classical trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a rare neuropathic pain with distinct diagnostic criteria. The aim of this review is to provide recommendations for medical management based on current evidence and provide some pointers on the conduct of future trials. A review of the literature identified four systematic reviews, of which one was a meta-analysis and 18 randomized controlled trials (RCT) on medical management of trigeminal neuralgia. The evidence suggests that carbamazepine is still the first line drug for medical management, but this should be changed to oxcarbazepine if there is poor efficacy and an unacceptable side effect profile. Combination of carbamazepine with lamotrigine or baclofen is the second line treatment when monotherapy fails, but the evidence is weak. An early neurosurgical opinion should be sought when a patient has a neurovascular contact of the trigeminal nerve, poor efficacy and tolerability of drug treatment and no remission periods. Many of the new antiepileptic drugs need to be evaluated in RCTs with innovative designs and robust outcome measures.

Trigeminal neuralgia: the diagnosis and management of this excruciating and poorly understood facial pain

Trigeminal neuralgia is defined as sudden, usually unilateral, severe, brief, stabbing recurrent episodes of pain within the distribution of one or more branches of the trigeminal nerve, which has a profound effect on quality of life. The diagnosis is made on history alone, and time needs to be taken to elicit the key features and differentiate from toothache or one of the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. Most trigeminal neuralgia is idiopathic, but a small percentage is due to secondary causes—for example, tumours or multiple sclerosis—which can be picked up on CT or MRI. Recently published international guidelines suggest that carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are the first-line drugs. There is limited evidence for the use of lamotrigine and baclofen. If there is a decrease in efficacy or tolerability of medication, surgery needs to be considered. A neurosurgical opinion should be sought early. There are several ablative, destructive procedures that can be carried out either at the level of the Gasserian ganglion or in the posterior fossa. The only non-destructive procedure is microvascular decompression (MVD). The ablative procedures give a 50% chance of patients being pain free for 4 years, compared with 70% of patients at 10 years after MVD. Ablative procedures result in sensory loss, and MVD carries a 0.2–0.4% risk of mortality with a 2–4% chance of ipsilateral hearing loss. Surgical procedures result in markedly improved quality of life. Patient support groups provide information and support to those in pain and play a crucial role.

The burning mouth syndrome remains an enigma

The patient who presents with a burning mouth is a challenge to all clinicians both medical and dental as too little carefully controlled research both on aetiological factors and management has been carried out.

Decision analysis of medical and surgical treatments for trigeminal neuralgia: how patient evaluations of benefits and risks affect the utility of treatment decisions.

Abstract Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a rare form of neuropathic facial pain characterised by severe, paroxysmal pains in the face. Little is known about the decision process in treatment of TN, and management with anti‐epileptic drugs or surgical procedures carries risks of side effects, recurrence and complications. One hundred fifty‐six previously diagnosed TN patients completed an adapted time‐trade‐off utility measurement questionnaire to ascertain how they valued the potential outcomes from various surgical and medical treatments. The decision analysis revealed that microvascular decompression surgery (MVD) offered the best chance of improved quality of life or highest maximum expected utility (MEU). MVD (MEU = 16.08 out of a possible 20) was closely followed by balloon compression (MEU = 15.97), percutaneous glycerol rhizolysis (MEU = 15.61) and then radiofrequency thermocoagulation (MEU = 14.93). Medication offered the least optimal chance of improved quality of life (MEU = 14.61). The difference between the highest (MVD) and lowest scoring treatments (medication) was 7.3% (1.46/20). These results were sensitive to some utility values, meaning the preferred treatment is changed by the values patients assign to outcomes. As surgical techniques narrowly offer the highest chance of maximising patient quality of life, all patients with TN should consider surgery. However, surgery is not right for everyone, and patients should be informed about their full range of choices. Treatment decisions must take place after careful consideration of the values patients place on benefits and risks of treatment.