Noninvasive trigeminal evoked potentials: normative data and application to neuralgia patients

Trigeminal somatosensory evoked magnetic fields to tactile stimulation

OBJECTIVE

To characterise the activation of the contra- and ipsilateral primary somatosensory cortex (SI) after tactile stimulation of the face.

METHODS

Trigeminal somatosensory evoked magnetic fields (TSEFs) were recorded after tactile stimulation of the lower lip, cheek, chin and forehead in 11 healthy subjects. The responses were determined visually from the waveforms and modelled with equivalent current dipoles (ECDs).

RESULTS

Contralateral SI responses were evoked in all subjects after lip stimulation, and in 91% and 64% after right and left cheek, 73% and 82% after chin and 64% and 27% after forehead stimulation. The responses usually showed an early double-peak wave pattern, the underlying sources localising to the SI. In addition, altogether 37 ipsilateral SI responses were evoked in eight subjects. Fourteen of these responses were amenable to ECD modelling and localised to ipsilateral SI.

CONCLUSIONS

Tactile stimulation of the lip area reliably activates the contralateral SI in normal subjects, but the success rate for other trigeminal areas is lower. Ipsilateral responses can be present after stimulation of any of the trigeminal branches in normal subjects.

SIGNIFICANCE

Recording of TSEFs after tactile stimulation of particularly the lip area provides a non-invasive technique to study the function of the trigeminal nerve.

Impairment of trigeminal sensory pathways in cluster headache

Cluster headache (CH) typically presents in clusters of attacks of intense (peri)orbital, unilateral pain. The distribution of the pain implies involvement of central and/or peripheral trigeminal pathways. These can be investigated by means of trigeminal somatosensory evoked potentials (TSEP) and blink reflexes (BR). We aimed to relate functional changes in trigeminal sensory pathways to the presence of cluster periods. TSEP and BR were performed in 28 episodic CH patients during a cluster period and repeated in 22 outside a cluster period. TSEP latencies (N1, P1 and N2) and amplitude (N1-P1 and P1-N2) and BR latencies (R1, R2 ipsilateral and R2 contralateral) were compared between sides, during and outside a cluster period and with healthy control data (n = 22). During a cluster period, N2 TSEP latencies were longer on the symptomatic side compared with the non-symptomatic side (27.2 +/- 3.0 ms vs. 26.3 +/- 3.4 ms, P = 0.02), and compared with the same side outside the cluster period (26.7 +/- 3.1 ms vs. 25.1 +/- 3.0 ms, P = 0.01). N1, P1 and N2 latencies on the symptomatic side in patients during the cluster period (14.8 +/- 2.3 ms, 20.4 +/- 2.5 ms and 27.2 +/- 3.0 ms, respectively) were significantly longer than those of healthy controls (13.4 +/- 1.9 ms, 18.8 +/- 2.4 ms and 25.0 +/- 2.6 ms, respectively, P < 0.03). Outside the cluster period, N1 latencies of both sides (15.3 +/- 2.8 ms symptomatic side and 15.4 +/- 2.6 ms asymptomatic side) were longer compared with controls (13.4 +/- 1.9 ms, P < 0.04). TSEP amplitudes and BR latencies revealed no significant differences. We conclude that abnormalities of the afferent trigeminal pathway are present in patients with cluster headache, most prominent during the cluster period, and on the symptomatic side. This seems primarily due of changes within the higher cerebral regions of the system.

Reproducibility and feasibility of neurophysiological assessment of the sensory trigeminal system for future application to paroxysmal headaches

As the distribution of pain in primary headaches suggests involvement of the trigeminal sensory pathways, trigeminal somatosensory evoked potentials (TSEP) and blink reflexes (BR) may provide important information about their functional integrity. Functional differences between symptomatic and non-symptomatic sides and between measurements during and outside attacks may be particularly informative. These tests should therefore be reproducible and should require a suitable number of patients for future studies in patients with primary, paroxysmal headaches. We performed TSEP and BR twice in 22 healthy volunteers, in order to calculate sample sizes based on reproducibility data. This is, to our knowledge, the first study investigating the reproducibility of TSEP and BR measurements. Latencies of TSEP and BR are appropriate for future studies, as their reproducibility allows practical sample sizes (less than 25 subjects). Duration, amplitude and area parameters of the BR responses were less appropriate for longitudinal studies.

Sensations and trigeminal somatosensory-evoked potentials elicited by electrical stimulation of endosseous oral implants in humans

The perception of bipolar electrical stimuli through implants was studied. The stimuli were delivered to permucosal oral endosseous implants in 15 individuals, who then reported tapping to beating sensations. In 10 out of the 15, these stimuli evoked clearly distinguishable potentials in the averaged electroencephalograms. The most prominent scalp potential was a positive wave with a latency between 18 and 25 ms, often preceded by a negative wave with a latency around 12-17 ms. In contrast, when a motor response was elicited by stimulation of the lip, a shorter latency wave around 8-11 ms was found additionally, indicating that the former-mentioned waves represent a true sensory response and not an artefact of myogenous origin. Furthermore, topical anaesthesia of the gingiva surrounding the implants in six individuals had little effect on the sensory responses. This evidence excluded peri-implant mucosal innervation as the origin of the perception and of the somatosensory-evoked waves elicited by the electrical stimulation of the oral implants. To the best of our knowledge, for the first time a sensation (osseoperception) has been elicited by electrical stimulation of endosseous oral implants and correlated with simultaneously recorded trigeminal somatosensory-evoked potentials (TSEPs).

Non-invasive trigeminal evoked potentials: normative aging data

A mild electric shock applied to the lower lip was used to elicit reliable evoked potentials from the trigeminal nerve in 50 normal adults who ranged in age from 20 to 69 years. The waveforms were morphologically similar to those observed with invasive procedures. No substantial effects for subject age, side of stimulation, or recording electrode were obtained for any of the individual trigeminal evoked potential amplitudes or latencies. Female subjects tended to have somewhat larger amplitudes and shorter latencies than male subjects. The results suggest that non-invasive procedures produce reliable evoked potential measures of trigeminal nerve function for patients of all ages.

The blink reflex before and after percutaneous glycerol rhizotomy in patients with trigeminal neuralgia--a prospective study of 28 patients

The blink reflex was prospectively studied in 28 patients with trigeminal neuralgia, prior-to and following percutaneous glycerol rhizotomy to the Gasserian ganglion. Fifteen patients (54%) had varying degrees of sensory loss in the trigeminal nerve distribution already before glycerol injection. Three more patients developed sensory loss following glycerol injection. Thus following glycerol injection 18 patients had graded sensory loss. Pre-injection the blink reflex showed abnormal R1 wave in 57% patients, while direct and consensual R2 waves were abnormal in 43% and 48%, respectively. Post-injection R1 wave was abnormal in 64% patients. Direct R2 waves were abnormal in 33% patients. Thus clinical findings of sensory loss correlated well with pre-and post-injection blink reflex abnormality. Postoperatively R1 and ipsilateral R2 latencies from the side of the injection deteriorated and consensual R2 latency improved, thus, signifying better function on the contralateral side following relief of pain by glycerol rhizotomy.

Usefulness of trigeminal somatosensory evoked potentials to detect subclinical trigeminal impairment in multiple sclerosis patients

Trigeminal somatosensory evoked potentials (TSEPs) by surface electric pulse stimulation were recorded in 30 normal subjects and in 70 multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, 13 of whom presenting clinical trigeminal impairment. We observed significant prolongation of all TSEPs parameters in MS group. TSEPs were abnormal in 45 patients (64.3%). Clinical and neurophysiological data agreed in 36 patients (51%) on 84 sides (60%). TSEPs were able to detect clinically silent lesions 54 times. TSEPs recording proves to be an additional useful test in MS multimodal evoked potential protocols.

Trigeminal neuralgia: typical or atypical?

The horrible disorder of trigeminal neuralgia has been reviewed in the medical literature for centuries. Various methods of diagnosis and treatment have been offered and yet, it has only been in the last few decades that two similar but different types of trigeminal neuralgias have been recognized. Typical trigeminal neuralgia, or tic douloureux, is by far the most recognized type, although atypical trigeminal neuralgia has recently appeared in the literature as well. It is of the utmost importance that these two neuralgias of the trigeminal nerve be accurately diagnosed as their forms of treatment are quite different. This short treatise will compare and contrast the two different types of trigeminal neuralgias, typical and atypical, and offer methods for treatment of both.