Literature DB >> 26339857

Long-term safety and efficacy of Gamma Knife surgery in classical trigeminal neuralgia: a 497-patient historical cohort study.

Jean Régis1, Constantin Tuleasca1,2,3,4,5, Noémie Resseguier6, Romain Carron1, Anne Donnet7, Jean Gaudart6, Marc Levivier4,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Gamma Knife surgery (GKS) is one of the surgical alternatives for the treatment of drug-resistant trigeminal neuralgia (TN). This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GKS in a large population of patients with TN with very long-term clinical follow-up.
METHODS: Between July 1992 and November 2010, 737 patients presenting with TN were treated using GKS. Data were collected prospectively and were further retrospectively evaluated at Timone University Hospital. The frequency and severity of pain, as well as trigeminal nerve function, were evaluated before GKS and regularly thereafter. Radiosurgery using the Gamma Knife (model B, C, 4C, or Perfexion) was performed with the help of both MR and CT targeting. A single 4-mm isocenter was positioned in the cisternal portion of the trigeminal nerve at a median distance of 7.6 mm (range 4-14 mm) anterior to the emergence of the nerve (retrogasserian target). A median maximum dose of 85 Gy (range 70-90 Gy) was prescribed.
RESULTS: The safety and efficacy are reported for 497 patients with medically refractory classical TN who were never previously treated by GKS and had a follow-up of at least 1 year. The median age in this series was 68.3 years (range 28.1-93.2 years). The median follow-up period was 43.8 months (range 12-174.4 months). Overall, 456 patients (91.75%) were initially pain free in a median time of 10 days (range 1-180 days). Their actuarial probabilities of remaining pain free without medication at 3, 5, 7, and 10 years were 71.8%, 64.9%, 59.7%, and 45.3%, respectively. One hundred fifty-seven patients (34.4%) who were initially pain free experienced at least 1 recurrence, with a median delay of onset of 24 months (range 0.6-150.1 months). However, the actuarial rate of maintaining pain relief without further surgery was 67.8% at 10 years. The hypesthesia actuarial rate at 5 years was 20.4% and at 7 years reached 21.1%, but remained stable until 14 years with a median delay of onset of 12 months (range 1-65 months). Very bothersome facial hypesthesia was reported in only 3 patients (0.6%).
CONCLUSIONS: Retrogasserian GKS proved to be safe and effective in the long term and in a very large number of patients. Even if the probability of long-lasting effects may be modest compared with microvascular decompression, the rarity of complications prompts discussion of using GKS as the pragmatic surgical first- or second-intention alternative for classical TN. However, a randomized trial, or at least a case-matched control study, would be required to compare with microvascular decompression.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BNI = Barrow Neurological Institute; CTN = classical trigeminal neuralgia; GKS = Gamma Knife surgery; Gamma Knife radiosurgery; MVD = microvascular decompression; TN = trigeminal neuralgia; efficacy; pain; safety; stereotactic radiosurgery; trigeminal neuralgia

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26339857     DOI: 10.3171/2015.2.JNS142144

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  32 in total

Review 1.  Diagnosis and management of chronic facial pain.

Authors:  A L Yao; M Barad
Journal:  BJA Educ       Date:  2020-02-11

2.  Factors affecting long-lasting pain relief after Gamma Knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia: a single institutional analysis and literature review.

Authors:  Lina R Barzaghi; Luigi Albano; Claudia Scudieri; Carmen R Gigliotti; Antonella Del Vecchio; Pietro Mortini
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 3.042

3.  Triple Puncture for Primary Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Yang-Pu Zhang; Yan Wang; Wen-Guang Xia; Ai-Qun Song
Journal:  Curr Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-25

Review 4.  Stereotactic radiosurgery alone for multiple brain metastases? A review of clinical and technical issues.

Authors:  Arjun Sahgal; Mark Ruschin; Lijun Ma; Wilko Verbakel; David Larson; Paul D Brown
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 12.300

5.  Percutaneous radiofrequency trigeminal rhizotomy benefits in patients with refractory trigeminal neuralgia.

Authors:  Chao-Chun Yang; Ming-Hsue Lee; Jen-Tsung Yang; Kuo-Tai Chen; Wei-Chao Huang; Ping-Jui Tsai; Chih-Hao Kao; Chien-Wei Liao; Martin Hsiu-Chu Lin
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 6.  Radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia: the state of art.

Authors:  Marcello Marchetti; Valentina Pinzi; Elena De Martin; Francesco Ghielmetti; Laura Fariselli
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 7.  Evaluation of CyberKnife Radiosurgery for Recurrent Trigeminal Neuralgia.

Authors:  Aldo Berti; George Ibars; Xiaodong Wu; Alex Sabo; Michelle Granville; Gail Suarez; James G Schwade; Robert E Jacobson
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-05-09

8.  Gamma Knife Radiosurgery for Multiple Sclerosis-Associated Trigeminal Neuralgia.

Authors:  Corbin A Helis; Emory McTyre; Michael T Munley; J Daniel Bourland; John T Lucas; Christina K Cramer; Stephen B Tatter; Adrian W Laxton; Michael D Chan
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.654

9.  Brainstem trigeminal fiber microstructural abnormalities are associated with treatment response across subtypes of trigeminal neuralgia.

Authors:  Sarasa Tohyama; Matthew R Walker; Jia Y Zhang; Joshua C Cheng; Mojgan Hodaie
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 6.961

10.  Radiofrequency thermocoagulation for V2/V3 idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia: effect of treatment temperatures on long-term clinical outcomes: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Peng Yao; Yi-Yong Deng; Tao Hong; Zhi-Bin Wang; Jia-Ming Ma; Yong-Qiang Zhu; Hong-Xi Li; Yuan-Yuan Ding; Shi-Nong Pan
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.889

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.