Diagnosis and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: consensus statement from the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group

INTRODUCTION

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a chronic neuropathic pain disorder affecting one or more branches of the trigeminal nerve. Despite its relatively low global prevalence, TN is an important healthcare problem both in neurology departments and in emergency departments due to the difficulty of diagnosing and treating the condition and its significant impact on patients' quality of life. For all these reasons, the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group has developed a consensus statement on the management of TN.

DEVELOPMENT

This document was drafted by a panel of neurologists specialising in headache, who used the terminology of the International Headache Society. We analysed the published scientific evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of TN and establish practical recommendations with levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of TN is based on clinical criteria. Pain attributed to a lesion or disease of the trigeminal nerve is divided into TN and painful trigeminal neuropathy, according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition. TN is further subclassified into classical, secondary, or idiopathic, according to aetiology. Brain MRI is recommended in patients with clinical diagnosis of TN, in order to rule out secondary causes. In MRI studies to detect neurovascular compression, FIESTA, DRIVE, or CISS sequences are recommended. Pharmacological treatment is the initial choice in all patients. In selected cases with drug-resistant pain or poor tolerance, surgery should be considered. [[es]]Resumen INTRODUCCIóN: la neuralgia del trigémino (NT) es un tipo de dolor neuropático que afecta a una o más ramas del nervio trigémino. Aunque su prevalencia poblacional es relativamente baja, la NT supone un problema muy importante tanto en las consultas de neurología como en las urgencias por la dificultad para el diagnóstico y tratamiento y el elevado impacto sobre la calidad de vida de las personas que la padecen. Por estos motivos, el Grupo de Estudio de Cefaleas de la Sociedad Española de Neurología ha elaborado un documento de consenso sobre el manejo de esta patología. DESARROLLO: este documento ha sido redactado por un comité de expertos utilizando la nomenclatura de la clasificación de la International Headache Society (IHS), analizando la evidencia científica publicada sobre diagnóstico y tratamiento y estableciendo unas recomendaciones prácticas con niveles de evidencia.

CONCLUSIONES

El diagnóstico de la NT es clínico. La International Classification of Headache Disorders en su tercera edición (ICHD-3) clasifica el dolor atribuible a una lesión o enfermedad del nervio trigémino en NT y neuropatía trigeminal dolorosa. A su vez la NT puede dividirse en tres tipos principales según la etiología del dolor: clásica, idiopática y secundaria. Es recomendable la realización de una resonancia magnética (RM) craneal a todo paciente con diagnóstico clínico de NT para descartar causas secundarias. Para estudiar la presencia de una compresión neurovascular con RM se recomienda la aplicación de los protocolos de imagen FIESTA, DRIVE o CISS. El tratamiento inicialmente será farmacológico y en pacientes seleccionados con respuesta insuficiente o mala tolerancia a fármacos se debe valorar el tratamiento quirúrgico.

[Posterior C1-C2 arthrodesis. Experience in transarticular and interarticular fixation in 36 patients]

OBJECTIVE

The stabilization of C1-C2 segment has evolved with the appearance of several techniques from sublaminar, transarticular or interarticular fixation and over recent years with the introduction of neuronavegation systems. The aim of the study was to review patients treated in our center with transarticular and interarticualr fixation and compare the results obtained with both techniques.

METHODS

Thirty six patients with C1-C2 instability that required a surgical fixation between 1995-2008 were retrostpectively analized. The causes of instability were principaly traumatic (18 cases) or degeneritive (16) and two cases of neoplasic lesions. In the first period (1995-2001) 20 patients were treated with transarticular fixation (Magerl's technique), and later (2002-2008) with interarticular fixation (Goel-Harms technique) in another 16 patients. Data was obtainned regarding complications, radiological evolution and clinical results (EVA pain score) and functionals (PROLO score) at 3, 6, 12 and >12 months post-op, as well as post-op cervical mobility and signs of bone fusion. A good result was considered if clinical improvement exi ted with decrease in EVA pain score > 5 points and funcional if a PROLO score > 4, regular if EVA decreased but <5 and PROLO <3 , and bad if there was no clinical or functional improvement. The results were statistically compared between both techniques.

RESULTS

Of the 20 patients treated with transarticular fixation, good results were obtained in 17 cases (85%) , regular in 2 (10%), and bad in 1 (5%). Complications included 1 case of vertebral artery lesion and 3 screw misplacements, one case in contact with vertebral artery. Regarding those treated with interarticualr fixation, in 14 (89%), good results were obtained, regular in 2 (12.5%) with 1 case of screw misplacement and another of postsurgical infection. No statistical significant differences were recorded between both techniques, although in those treated with interarticular fixation there was a higher rate of bone fusion and no cases of vertebral arterial lesions were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Transarticular and interarticular C1- C2 fixation is safe and provides a high rate of good results with few complications. The introduction of neuronavigation systems can increase the efficacy and safety of these techniques.

[Comparison [corrected] of Chiari I malformation treatment using suboccipital craniectomy and posterior arch of C1 resection with or without dural graft]

There are various surgical approaches to treat Chiari I malformation. In spite of the good clinical results that are reported with most of them, there is still controversy about the optimal treatment of this pathology.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and radiological results of surgical treatment of the Chiari I malformation with suboccipital craniectomy, posterior arch of C1 resection with or without dural graft, analyzing clinical and radiological findings and describing the complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospectively clinical cases series of patients who underwent Chiari I malformation surgery between 1998 and 2006 in the Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol in Badalona. The inclusion criteria consisted in: patients older than 18 years, who have had surgery in our hospital, detailed neurological examination before and after surgery (calculating the EDSS scale punctuation), craniospinal magnetic resonance imaging before and after surgery and minimal follow up period of 6 months. The election of the surgical approach was left to the discretion of the main surgeon. Patients were divided in two groups depending of the surgical technique: Group A (with dural graft) and Group B (without dural graft). To evaluate the morphological results in both groups, measurements of the position of the fastigium above a basal line in the midsagittal T1 weighted magnetic resonance images were obtained. In patients with syringomyelia, siringo-to-cord ratio was measured before and after surgery. To evaluate the clinical results, neurological examination was recorded in both groups before and after surgery.

RESULTS

The mean age of Group A patients was 47 (-/+12.89) years, and of Group B was 38.3 (-/+7.77) years. Mean follow up period was 2.48 (-/+2.44) years in Group A and 4.2 (-/+4.46) in Group B. Creation of an artificial cisterna magna was observed en 35.7% of Group A patients and only in 3.5% of Group B patients (p=0.022). In 8 patients front Group A, 8 patients (28.6%) an upward migration of the cerebellum was seen, whereas any of the Group B patients presented it (p=0.022) Siringo-to-cord ratios were decreased in both groups without significant differences. All of the Group A patients improved their clinical exploration. In Group B, 60% of the patients improved and the 40% left maintained clinical stability. Any patient worsened. All patients that maintained clinical stability belonged to Group B, the differences between the two groups were statistically significant (p=0.04). Five patients presented immediate surgical complications (2 pseudomeningoceles, 2 meningitis and 1 hydrocephalus). All this patients where operated with dural graft (p=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our study, suboccipital craniectomy with resection of the posterior arch of C1 and dural graft shows better clinical and radiological results than without dural graft. Nevertheless this technique can increase the incidence of surgical complications.