Ronak H Jani1, Marion A Hughes1,2, Michael S Gold1,3, Barton F Branstetter1,2, Zachary E Ligus1, Raymond F Sekula1,4. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Med-icine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. Dep-artment of Radiology, University of Pit-tsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Neurobi-ology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Neuro-logical Surgery, University of Pitt-sburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While high-resolution imaging is increasingly used in guiding decisions about surgical interventions for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, direct assessment of the extent of vascular contact of the trigeminal nerve is still considered the gold standard for the determination of whether nerve decompression is warranted. OBJECTIVE: To compare intraoperative and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of the prevalence and severity of vascular compression of the trigeminal nerve in patients without classical trigeminal neuralgia. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 27 patients without facial pain who were undergoing microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm and had undergone high-resolution preoperative MRI. Neurovascular contact/compression (NVC/C) by artery or vein was assessed both intraoperatively and by MRI, and was stratified into 3 types: simple contact, compression (indentation of the surface of the nerve), and deformity (deviation or distortion of the nerve). RESULTS: Intraoperative evidence of NVC/C was detected in 23 patients. MRI evidence of NVC/C was detected in 18 patients, all of whom had intraoperative evidence of NVC/C. Thus, there were 5, or 28% more patients in whom NVC/C was detected intraoperatively than with MRI (Kappa = 0.52); contact was observed in 4 of these patients and compression in 1 patient. In patients where NVC/C was observed by both methods, there was agreement regarding the severity of contact/compression in 83% (15/18) of patients (Kappa = 0.47). No patients exhibited deformity of the nerve by imaging or intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: There was moderate agreement between imaging and operative findings with respect to both the presence and severity of NVC/C.
BACKGROUND: While high-resolution imaging is increasingly used in guiding decisions about surgical interventions for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, direct assessment of the extent of vascular contact of the trigeminal nerve is still considered the gold standard for the determination of whether nerve decompression is warranted. OBJECTIVE: To compare intraoperative and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of the prevalence and severity of vascular compression of the trigeminal nerve in patients without classical trigeminal neuralgia. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 27 patients without facial pain who were undergoing microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm and had undergone high-resolution preoperative MRI. Neurovascular contact/compression (NVC/C) by artery or vein was assessed both intraoperatively and by MRI, and was stratified into 3 types: simple contact, compression (indentation of the surface of the nerve), and deformity (deviation or distortion of the nerve). RESULTS: Intraoperative evidence of NVC/C was detected in 23 patients. MRI evidence of NVC/C was detected in 18 patients, all of whom had intraoperative evidence of NVC/C. Thus, there were 5, or 28% more patients in whom NVC/C was detected intraoperatively than with MRI (Kappa = 0.52); contact was observed in 4 of these patients and compression in 1 patient. In patients where NVC/C was observed by both methods, there was agreement regarding the severity of contact/compression in 83% (15/18) of patients (Kappa = 0.47). No patients exhibited deformity of the nerve by imaging or intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: There was moderate agreement between imaging and operative findings with respect to both the presence and severity of NVC/C.
Authors: Indra Yousry; Bernhard Moriggl; Markus Holtmannspoetter; Urs D Schmid; Thomas P Naidich; Tarek A Yousry Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Andrew L Ko; Albert Lee; Ahmed M Raslan; Alp Ozpinar; Shirley McCartney; Kim J Burchiel Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Raymond F Sekula; Andrew M Frederickson; Barton F Branstetter; James E Oskin; Dale R Stevens; Nathan T Zwagerman; Ramesh Grandhi; Marion A Hughes Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2014-07-11 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: John W Rutland; Bradley N Delman; Rebecca E Feldman; Nadejda Tsankova; Hung-Mo Lin; Francesco Padormo; Raj K Shrivastava; Priti Balchandani Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2019-11-21
Authors: Weilai Dong; Sheng Chih Jin; August Allocco; Xue Zeng; Amar H Sheth; Shreyas Panchagnula; Annie Castonguay; Louis-Étienne Lorenzo; Barira Islam; Geneviève Brindle; Karine Bachand; Jamie Hu; Agata Sularz; Jonathan Gaillard; Jungmin Choi; Ashley Dunbar; Carol Nelson-Williams; Emre Kiziltug; Charuta Gavankar Furey; Sierra Conine; Phan Q Duy; Adam J Kundishora; Erin Loring; Boyang Li; Qiongshi Lu; Geyu Zhou; Wei Liu; Xinyue Li; Michael C Sierant; Shrikant Mane; Christopher Castaldi; Francesc López-Giráldez; James R Knight; Raymond F Sekula; J Marc Simard; Emad N Eskandar; Christopher Gottschalk; Jennifer Moliterno; Murat Günel; Jason L Gerrard; Sulayman Dib-Hajj; Stephen G Waxman; Fred G Barker; Seth L Alper; Mohamed Chahine; Shozeb Haider; Yves De Koninck; Richard P Lifton; Kristopher T Kahle Journal: iScience Date: 2020-09-11