| Literature DB >> 35444611 |
Annabella Kurz1, Gerd Fabian Volk2,3,4, Dirk Arnold2,3, Berit Schneider-Stickler1, Winfried Mayr5, Orlando Guntinas-Lichius2,3,4.
Abstract
This article addresses the potential clinical value of surface electrical stimulation in the acute phase of denervation after the onset of facial nerve or recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis. These two nerve lesions are the most frequent head and neck nerve lesions. In this review, we will work out several similarities concerning the pathophysiology features and the clinical scenario between both nerve lesions, which allow to develop some general rules for surface electrical stimulation applicable for both nerve lesions. The focus is on electrical stimulation in the phase between denervation and reinnervation of the target muscles. The aim of electrostimulation in this phase of denervation is to bridge the time until reinnervation is complete and to maintain facial or laryngeal function. In this phase, electrostimulation has to stimulate directly the denervated muscles, i.e. muscle stimulation and not nerve stimulation. There is preliminary data that early electrostimulation might also improve the functional outcome. Because there are still caveats against the use of electrostimulation, the neurophysiology of denervated facial and laryngeal muscles in comparison to innervated muscles is explained in detail. This is necessary to understand why the negative results published in several studies that used stimulation parameters are not suitable for denervated muscle fibers. Juxtaposed are studies using parameters adapted for the stimulation of denervated facial or laryngeal muscles. These studies used standardized outcome measure and show that an effective and tolerable electrostimulation of facial and laryngeal muscles without side effects in the early phase after onset of the lesions is feasible, does not hinder nerve regeneration and might even be able to improve the functional outcome. This has now to be proven in larger controlled trials. In our view, surface electrical stimulation has an unexploited potential to enrich the early therapy concepts for patients with unilateral facial or vocal fold paralysis.Entities:
Keywords: electrical stimulation; facial nerve; muscle stimulation; nerve regeneration; nerve regeneration electrical stimulation; nerve stimulation; recurrent laryngeal nerve; vagal nerve
Year: 2022 PMID: 35444611 PMCID: PMC9013944 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.869900
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.086
Potential scenarios for electrical stimulation (ES) after facial or recurrent nerve lesion.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| In the acute phase of nerve lesion and denervation | ||
| Intraoperative ES | Freshly lesioned nerve | Muscle status unchanged |
| Early onset ES | Nerve axons start to regenerate, muscles are not reinnervated yet | Muscles are denervated |
| ES during reinnervation | Some axons have reinnervated target muscles, reinnervation ongoing | Muscle partly denervated, partly reinnervated |
| In the chronic phase of nerve lesion and denervation or reinnervation | ||
| ES for flaccid paralysis | No viable nerve | Denervated muscles with progressive atrophy |
| ES for post-paralytic synkinesis | Pathological reinnervation terminated | Muscles are synkinetically reinnervated |
This review is focused on ES early after onset of the lesion and muscle denervation up to the phase of muscle reinnervation (highlighted in gray).
Definition of different types of electrical stimulation (ES) with different therapy goals or different invasiveness.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Functional ES | The stimulation by ES triggers coordinated contractions to support restricted or absent motor function. |
| Neuromuscular ES | Here, ES is a more passive treatment approach. Predominantly structural and functional deficits stand in the foreground |
| Bridging ES | ES is bridging the period between the first onset of the facial or recurrent laryngeal nerve lesion and muscle-preserving surgery, to prevent atrophy of mimic or laryngeal muscles |
| Conditioning ES | ES should promote nerve regeneration back to the original target and decrease misdirected reinnervation |
| Invasive ES | Direct ES on the nerve and/or muscle, needs invasive exposure of the nerve and/or muscle |
| Non-invasive ES | Transcutaneous ES without opening of the body surface |
Figure 1Pulse duration = rise time in ms versus threshold current in mA (I/T curves). The curves for normal innervated muscle (green) and denervated muscles (red) cross at 50–100 ms pulse duration. The damaged muscle responds to longer triangular pulses even at lower currents than the normal muscle or the sensitive nervous elements of the skin. The threshold curve of the sensitive and pain fibers run below the threshold curve of normal muscle fibers green. The denervated muscle can be selectively stimulated with long triangular pulses in the hatched area. The original concept was developed by Thom (46) and Martin and Witt (47).
Figure 2Pulse duration / threshold (I/T) curves only for denervated muscles for rectangular pulses (light blue) compared to triangular pulses (dark green) at higher magnification. The curve for rectangular pulses runs below the curve for triangular pulses up to a duration of 100 ms. In the area interest, above 100 ms, the curves run almost parallel. This is important, since triangular pulses are more effective than rectangular waveform, mostly because of the lower discomfort threshold. The idealized sketch follows the data from Arnold et al. (22).
Figure 3Optimal placement of the surface electrodes for transcutaneous facial muscle stimulation, here shown for the zygomatic muscle.
Important studies on electrical stimulation in the early acute phase of facial nerve lesion and muscle denervation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arnold et al. 2021 ( | 3 of 5 with acute palsy | Pro | Facial nerve reconstruction | STMISOLA or Stimulette r2x | triangular and rectangular biphasic | n.a. | 150 ms (variable), also bursts at 7 Hz with a PW of 50 ms; single pulses | 0.3–4 mA | session of 30 min | n. s. | 6–12 months | Visible upward movement of the corner the mouth in video | Establishment of an effective and tolerable protocol |
| Sommerauer et al. 2020 ( | 1 | Case report | Facial nerve reconstruction | Paresestim | n. s. | n. s. | up to 100 ms | up to 10 mA | 2 times 10 min per day | n. s. | 19 months | Visible facial movements | Improvement to bridge reinnervation time |
| Puls et al. 2020 ( | 13 | Retro | spontaneous reinnervation after postop paralysis | Paresestim | biphasic triangular | Same length as phase duration | 110 ms (range 100–280); single pulses | 14 mA (range 6–20) | twice per day for 10 min, 5 days per week. | 4.7–13.2 days | 13–37 months | Improvement in eFACE and Sunnybrook grading | Lower synkinesis rate |
| Mäkelä et al. 2020 ( | 15 | Pro? | Acute facial palsy | Self-made stimulator | biphasic | 200 ms | 0.4 ms | average 4.9 mA (range: 3–8) | 2 h | 7–82 days | at 2 days | Dry Eye Questionnaires; NRS for pain/discomfort | Producing a reliable blink |
| 250 Hz | |||||||||||||
| Loyo et al. 2020 ( | planned | RCT | Bell's palsy | OrthoStim | monophasic | 30 s | 100 μs | 10 contractions over 20 min | <30 days | 6 months? | eFACE, House-Brackmann, Sunnybrook, FaCE, SAQ | ES promotes recovery | |
| 35 Hz | |||||||||||||
| Kim and Choi 2016 ( | 30 w ES | Pro RCT | Bell's palsy | version 3; Kwangwoo Medix | rectangular, monophasic | 80 μs | 10 ms | average 1.4 mA | Sessions: “continuous”; Sessions per week: “continuous” | 2 weeks | 2 months | House-Brackmann; Sunnybrook | Better than without ES |
| 30 w/o ES | 20 Hz | ||||||||||||
| Tuncay et al. 2015 ( | (28 w ES) | Pro RCT | Bell's palsy | Dynatron 438 | monophasic | 300 ms | 100 ms | n. s. | 5 days per week three sets of 30 minimal contractions | n. s. | 3 weeks | House-Brackmann; FDI | Improved functional facial movements |
| 32 w/o ES | pulse rate of 2.5 pulses/sec | ||||||||||||
| Frigerio et al. 2015 ( | 40 | Pro | Acute facial paralysis | STMISOLA | ? | 1 ms | 0.4–1 ms | 7.2 mA ( | ? | 6-58 days | once | High-speed video analysis of blink characteristics | Producing a reliable eye closure |
| 100-50 Hz | |||||||||||||
| Alakram and Puckree 2010 ( | 16 | Pro RCT | Bell's palsy | EV-803 Digital SD TENS | biphasic | 10 μs | 10 μs | n. s. | 30 min. Sessions per week: 1 | n. s. | 3 months | FDI | No effect on recovery rate |
| 10 Hz | |||||||||||||
| Mosforth and Taverner 1958 ( | 83 | Pro RCT | Bell's palsy | Ritchie-Sneath | galvanic | n. s. | 100 ms | n. s. | 3 sets of 30 contractions, Sessions per week: 3 | <2 weeks | up to 12 months | Clinical examination | No effect on recovery rate |
ES, electrical stimulation; w, with; w/o, without; pro, prospective; retro, retrospective; RCT, randomized controlled trial; n.a., not applicable; n.s., not specified, .
Figure 4Optimal placement of the surface electrodes for transcutaneous intralaryngeal muscle stimulation. The electrodes should be additionally fixed by a circular cervical dressing.
Important studies on electrical stimulation in the early acute phase of recurrent laryngeal nerve lesion and muscle denervation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kurz et al. 2021 ( | 25 w ES | Retro | UVFP after thyroid surgery | Stimulette rx or Stimulette r2x | Biphasic | 50 ms | 100–250 ms; single pulses | n.s | twice a day for 25 min (3 × 5 min; stimulation interval with 2 × 5 min breaks) i | up to 3 months | RBH, vocal fold position, glottal closure during phonation | As effective as voice therapy | |
| 26 w/o ES | |||||||||||||
| Kurz et al. 2021 ( | 32 | Pro | UVFP | STMISOLA | Biphasic triangular | n.s | 1, 10, 25, 50, 100, 250, and 500 ms | 1–20 mA | Trains of 5 pulses | n.a. | once | Sensitivity and discomfort threshold, vocal fold adduction at rest/phonation | Establishment of an effective and tolerable protocol |
| Garcia Perez et al. 2014 ( | 10 | Pro | UVFP | PIC16F877A, Microchip Technology | n.s | •−0.5 ms; | 0–10 mA | n.s | 10 – 24 months | 10 weekly 30-min-long stimulation sessions | F0, jitter (%), shimmer (%), HNR; NNE; MPT | Acoustic analysis revealed significant improvements | |
| 500 Hz | |||||||||||||
| Ptok and Strack. 2008 ( | 33 w ES | RCT | UVFP after iatrogenic or idiopathic lesion | VocaSTIM, Physiomed | Biphasic | n.a. | 240 ms; | n.s | n.s | >2 weeks; <6 months | 3 months | standardized text, MPT, CFx, CFx index | More effective than voice therapy |
| 36 w/o ES | single pulses | ||||||||||||
| Kruse 1989 ( | Review | Retro | UVFP after thyroid surgery | Laryngoton | Biphasic | n.a. | 50–250 ms; | <20 mA | n.s | n.s | pitch change at constant phonation | More effective than voice therapy | |
| single pulses | |||||||||||||
| Dahl and Witt 2006 ( | 18 w ES | Pro | UVFP after iatrogenic or idiopathic lesion | VocaSTIM, Physiomed | Biphasic | n.a. | 240 ms; | n.s | 10x, 2–3/week | n.s | 16–20 weeks | PPQ; APQ; SPI; NHR; Jitter, Shimmer; VTI; glottal gap during phonation | More effective than voice therapy |
| 8 w/o 8 | single pulses | ||||||||||||
| Schleier & Streubel 1980 ( | 42 w ES | Retro | several etiologies, | RS 8 & RS 12 TUR | Biphasic | 0 | 1.5–2 ms; | <6 mA | n.s | n.s | 10 min, 21 sessions | vocal fold position | More effective than voice therapy |
| 4 w/o ES | 120–280 Hz |
ES, electrical stimulation; w, with; w/o, without; UVFP, unilateral vocal fold palsy; pro, prospective; retro, retrospective; RCT, randomized controlled trial; n.a., not applicable,; n.s., not specified;
Devices used: Stimulette rx or Stimulette r2x (Dr. Schufried, Vienna, Austria), STMISOLA (BIOPAC, Germany), Microchip technology (Arizona, United States), VocaSTIM (Physiomed, Schnaittach, Germany), Laryngoton (IPS, Braunschweig, Germany), RS 8 & RS 12 TUR (Starkstrom Anlagenbau VEB, former East Germany); HNR, harmonics-to-noise ratio; NNe, normalized noise energy (NNE); MPT, maximum phonation time; CFx, vocal fold irregularity; PPQ, pitch perturbation quotient; APQ, amplitude perturbation quotient; SPI, soft Phonation Index; NHR, noise-to-harmonic ratio; VTI, voice turbulence index.
Figure 5Idealistic view on the optimal window for electrical stimulation of early acute denervated facial or laryngeal muscles. Pulse duration / threshold (I/T) curve (red) for denervated facial and laryngeal muscles in relation to side effect threshold (i.e. discomfort, pain, stimulation of other muscles; green zone). Sensitivity threshold (purple) illustrates the threshold when the patients feel the electrical stimulation (all left Y-axis). The dotted lines show the efficacy of facial muscle (yellow) or laryngeal muscle (blue) stimulation in % of patients with responses (right Y-axis).
Figure 6Optimal window for electrical stimulation of early acute denervated facial or laryngeal muscles, relation to specific side effects highlighted. This figures illustrates the similarities for optimal electrostimulation of the facial or laryngeal muscle stimulation. (A) Stimulation of facial muscles. (B) Stimulation of intralaryngeal muscles for glottic adduction.