What is the best treatment of drug-resistant trigeminal neuralgia in patients affected by multiple sclerosis? A literature analysis of surgical procedures

Objective

Drug-resistant trigeminal neuralgia (TN) can complicate the clinical course of patients affected by multiple sclerosis (MS). Various surgical procedures have been reported for the treatment of this condition, but there is no agreement on the best management of these patients. To our knowledge, there is no critical literature analysis focusing on this particular topic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of different surgical procedures utilized for drug-resistant TN in MS patients.

Methods

We reviewed the literature about the studies reporting on surgical treatment of drug-resistant TN in MS patients. Case reports and case series less than 4 patients were excluded from the analysis. Nineteen studies were selected for the statistical analysis. To reduce the variability of the data, the selected studies were evaluated for the following outcome parameters: acute pain relief rate (APR), rate of recurrence (RR), pain free at follow-up rate (PF at FU) and complication rate (CR). For the statistical analysis, chi-square statistic, using the Fisher's exact test was utilized.

Results

There was no procedure statistically superior in terms of APR rate in MS patients following the surgical treatment of TN. The highest RR was observed for percutaneous balloon compression (PBC) (60.2 ± 14.4%). This result was statistically significant when compared to gamma knife surgery (GKS) (p = 0.0129) and microvascular decompression (MVD) (p = 0.0281). MVD together with percutaneous radiofrequency rhizothomy (PRR) was associated with a statistically better PF at FU rate (56.5 ± 16.8% and 73.5 ± 14.2%, respectively). However PBC and MVD showed statistical significant minor CR compared to other techniques (no complications and 18.7 ± 17.4%, respectively).

Conclusion

Our study shows no differences in the short term results among different procedures for TN in MS patients. Each technique demonstrate advantages and limits in terms of long term pain, recurrence rate and complication rate. Each patient should be accurately informed on pros and cons of each procedure in order to be involved in the most appropriate choice.     

Primary multicentric anaplastic pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma with atypical features

Pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA) is a rare tumor with good prognosis after surgery. Few cases of anaplastic PXA (either de novo or secondary to transformation of a recurrent low grade PXA) have been reported. Moreover, primary anaplastic PXA with dissemination at diagnosis has been described only in two patients, to our knowledge. We report the first case of primary multicentric anaplastic PXA and discuss its atypical features and the pertinent literature.     

Adult-onset mitochondrial movement disorders: a national picture from the Italian Network

Journal of Neurology - Both prevalence and clinical features of the various movement disorders in adults with primary mitochondrial diseases are unknown. Based on the database of the...     

Commentary: IARC Monographs Program and public health under siege by corporate interests

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) evaluates causes of cancer with help from independent international experts in an open and transparent manner. Countries, research and regulatory agencies, and other organizations adopt IARC evaluations for communication of human cancer hazards, and for strategies to prevent cancer. Scientists worldwide endorse IARC cancer evaluations and process. Those with economic interests, however, challenge IARC's cancer evaluations, most recently for glyphosate and red and processed meats, and are conducting a campaign including intervention from US Congressional Representatives to discredit IARC's review process and to undermine financial support—a campaign intimidating to IARC and Working Group members. Challenges to scientific interpretations serve to advance science and should be resolved by scientific experts who do not have conflicts of interest. Such interference does not bode well for the free flow of scientific information that informs and protects the public from risks of cancer.