Repeat Surgery for Recurrent or Refractory Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Surgery can effectively treat Trigeminal neuralgia (TN), but postoperative pain recurrence or nonresponse are common. Repeat surgery is frequently offered but limited data exist to guide the selection of salvage surgical procedures. We aimed to compare pain relief outcomes after repeat microvascular decompression (MVD), percutaneous rhizotomy (PR), or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to determine which modality was most efficacious for surgically refractory TN. METHODS: A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed, including studies of adults with classical or idiopathic TN undergoing repeat surgery. Primary outcomes included complete (CPR) and adequate (APR) pain relief at last follow-up, analyzed in a multivariate mixed-effect meta-regression of proportions. Secondary outcomes were initial pain relief and facial numbness. RESULTS: Of 1299 records screened, 61 studies with 68 treatment arms (29 MVD, 14 PR, and 25 SRS) comprising 2165 patients were included. Combining MVD, PR, and SRS study data, 68.8% achieved initial CPR after a repeat TN procedure. On average, 49.6% of the combined sample of MVD, PR, and SRS had CPR at final follow-up, which was on average 2.99 years postoperatively. The proportion (with 95% CI) achieving CPR at final follow-up was 0.57 (0.51-0.62) for MVD, 0.60 (0.52-0.68) for PR, and 0.35 (0.30-0.41) for SRS, with a significantly lower proportion of pain relief with SRS. Estimates of initial CPR for MVD were 0.82 (0.78-0.85), 0.68 for PR (0.6-0.76), and 0.41 for SRS (0.35-0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Across MVD, PR, and SRS, about half of TN patients maintain complete CPR at an average follow-up time of 3 years after repeat surgery. In treating refractory or recurrent TN, MVD and PR were superior to SRS in both initial pain relief and long-term pain relief at final follow-up. These findings can inform surgical decision-making in this challenging population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".