Abstract
Introduction
Trigeminal neuralgia is a sudden, unilateral, brief, stabbing, recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. Pain occurs in paroxysms, which can last from a few seconds to several minutes. The frequency of the paroxysms ranges from a few to hundreds of attacks a day. Periods of remission can last for months to years, but tend to shorten over time. The condition can impair activities of daily living and lead to depression.
Methods and outcomes
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of ongoing treatments in people with trigeminal neuralgia? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2013 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Results
We found seven studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
Conclusions
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: baclofen; carbamazepine; gabapentin; lamotrigine; oxcarbazepine; microvascular decompression; and destructive neurosurgical techniques (radiofrequency thermocoagulation, glycerol rhizolysis, balloon compression, and stereotactic radiosurgery).
Key Points
Trigeminal neuralgia is a sudden, unilateral, brief, stabbing, recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. The diagnosis is made on the history alone, based on characteristic features of the pain.
Pain occurs in paroxysms, which can last from a few seconds to several minutes. The frequency of the paroxysms ranges from a few to hundreds of attacks a day.
Periods of remission can last for months to years, but tend to get shorter over time.
The condition can impair activities of daily living and lead to depression.
The annual incidence in the UK (based on GP practice lists and rather liberal diagnostic criteria) has been reported to be 26.8 per 100,000. However, studies in other countries such as the US and the Netherlands, with stricter definitions, have reported much lower incidence rates ranging between 5.9 and 12.6 per 100,000.
Experts find that symptoms worsen over time and become less responsive to medication despite dose increases and adding further agents.
Treatment success is defined differently in studies of medical and surgical therapies for trigeminal neuralgia.
Treatment success in medical studies is usually defined as at least 50% pain relief from baseline. However, complete pain relief is the measure of treatment success in surgical studies.
Carbamazepine is considered the gold-standard for the initial medical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia symptoms.
Carbamazepine has been shown to increase pain relief compared with placebo, but also increases adverse effects, such as drowsiness, dizziness, rash, liver damage, and ataxia.
Studies evaluating durability of response with carbamazepine are lacking, but consensus expert opinion suggests that it may have a greater than 50% failure rate for long-term (5-10 year) pain control.
Based on the strength of published evidence, carbamazepine remains the best supported standard medical treatment for trigeminal neuralgia.
There is consensus that oxcarbazepine is an effective treatment in people with trigeminal neuralgia and may have fewer adverse effects than carbamazepine, although there is a lack of RCT-based data to confirm this.
Oxcarbazepine rarely provides complete or long-term pain relief, although studies evaluating durability of response with this drug are lacking.
We found no sufficient evidence to judge the effectiveness of baclofen or lamotrigine.
Lamotrigine is often used in people who cannot tolerate carbamazepine, but the dose must be increased slowly to avoid rashes, thus making it unsuitable for acute use.
There is consensus that baclofen may be useful for people with multiple sclerosis who develop trigeminal neuralgia.
We found no evidence comparing gabapentin versus placebo/no treatment or other treatments covered in this review in people with trigeminal neuralgia.
Gabapentin does have support for use in treating other neuropathic pain conditions, particularly multiple sclerosis.
Despite a lack of RCT data, observational evidence supports the use of microvascular decompression to relieve symptoms of trigeminal neuralgia.
Microvascular decompression has been shown in at least two prospective comparative cohort trials to have superiority over stereotactic radiosurgery for complete pain relief, durability of response (up to 5 years), and preservation of trigeminal sensation.
However, microvascular decompression requires general anaesthesia and can, albeit rarely, be associated with surgical complications, of which a less than 5% risk of ipsilateral hearing loss appears to be the most common.
Well-conducted observational studies have demonstrated that microvascular decompression has a greater magnitude of therapeutic effect than any medical and surgical therapy for trigeminal neuralgia. As such, this procedure is unlikely to be compared against best medical therapy in an RCT.
We found no RCT evidence comparing percutaneous destructive neurosurgical techniques (radiofrequency thermocoagulation, glycerol rhizolysis, balloon compression) or non-percutaneous destructive neurosurgical techniques (stereotactic radiosurgery) versus placebo/no treatment or other treatments covered in this review in people with trigeminal neuralgia.
Observational data suggest that radiofrequency thermocoagulation may offer higher rates of complete pain relief than glycerol rhizolysis and stereotactic radiosurgery, but may also be associated with higher rates of complications (e.g., facial numbness and corneal insensitivity).
In contrast to stereotactic radiosurgery, pain relief with microvascular decompression and percutaneous destructive neurosurgical techniques is immediate, but they require sedation and/or anaesthesia to perform, which are not required for stereotactic radiosurgery.
Clinical context
General background
Trigeminal neuralgia is a rare condition that causes excruciating intermittent, short-lasting facial pain that is usually unilateral, is typically provoked by light touch, and is often mistaken initially as a tooth pain. First-line treatment involves anticonvulsant drugs, generally carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine, but other agents are also used. These drugs can provide significant initial pain relief, but with time response becomes poorer despite escalating doses. Side effects also increase significantly. Patients may then be referred for surgery or treated with second-line medications, although there is little or no evidence to guide these choices.
Focus of the review
Trigeminal neuralgia can be managed both medically and surgically with varying outcomes. This review identifies the clinical trial evidence supporting the use of the first-line medical options and the surgical treatments for classical idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. There are RCTs supporting use of anticonvulsants such as carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, which provide 50% pain relief in 70% of patients. Surgery can provide 100% pain relief with no further need for medication but there are no RCTs of microvascular decompression, potentially the most effective management, and other surgical procedures have been evaluated only in RCTs comparing techniques, and as such are very limited.
Comments on evidence
The most effective drugs are anticonvulsants, but design of drug trials is complicated because the gold-standard drug, carbamazepine, takes up to 3 weeks to be fully eliminated, and the disease is so severe that it is unethical to use a placebo. New designs are, therefore, needed and are being attempted. There are no randomised controlled trials comparing surgical options, and very few comparing technical variations of single techniques. The best surgical data are from prospective comparative cohort trials. Moreover, the disease can suddenly become extremely severe with longer-lasting bouts of pain, and there are no studies on how this should be managed. Given the difficulties inherent in conducting trials for both medical and surgical treatments, the evidence remains sparse, especially for the surgical therapies.
Search and appraisal summary
The update literature search for this review was carried out from the date of the last search, September 2007, to September 2013. For more information on the electronic databases searched and criteria applied during assessment of studies for potential relevance to the review, please see the Methods section. Searching of electronic databases retrieved 170 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 75 records were screened for inclusion in the review. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 54 studies and the further review of 21 full publications. Of the 21 full articles evaluated, two systematic reviews were added at this update. Based upon their own search, the contributors added two additional observational studies to the Comment section.
Additional information
Ideally, patients benefit from surgical evaluation and counselling early in the disease process, so that appropriate contingency plans among varying surgical alternatives can be considered and decided upon before high-dose drug therapy interferes with cognition and memory, and before severe pain leads to time-urgent desperation. Acute severe attacks should be managed with lidocaine injections or infusions rather than opioids, which are ineffective.
About this condition
Definition
Trigeminal neuralgia is a characteristic pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. The diagnosis is made on the history alone, based on characteristic features of the pain. It occurs in paroxysms, with each pain lasting from a few seconds to several minutes. The frequency of paroxysms is highly variable, ranging from hundreds of attacks a day to long periods of remission that can last years. Between paroxysms, the person is asymptomatic. The pain is severe and described as intense, sharp, superficial, stabbing, or shooting — often like an electric shock. It can be triggered by light touch in any area innervated by the trigeminal nerve, including eating, talking, washing the face, or cleaning the teeth. The condition can impair activities of daily living and lead to depression. In some people there remains a background pain of lower intensity for 50% of the time. This has been termed atypical trigeminal neuralgia or type 2 trigeminal neuralgia. The International Classification for Headache Disorders (ICHD) refers to this condition as trigeminal neuralgia with concomitant pain. Other causes of facial pain may need to be excluded. In trigeminal neuralgia, the neurological examination is usually normal but sensory and autonomic symptoms may be reported, and people with longer histories may demonstrate subtle sensory loss on careful examination.
Incidence/ Prevalence
Most evidence about the incidence and prevalence of trigeminal neuralgia is from the US. The annual incidence (age adjusted to the 1980 age distribution of the US) is 5.9/100,000 women and 3.4/100,000 men. The incidence tends to be slightly higher in women at all ages, and increases with age. In men aged over 80 years, the incidence is 45.2/100,000. One questionnaire survey of neurological disease in one French village found one person with trigeminal neuralgia among 993 people. A retrospective cohort study in UK primary care, which examined the histories of 6.8 million people, found that 8268 people had trigeminal neuralgia, giving it an incidence of 26.8/100,000 person-years. A similar primary care study carried out in the Netherlands reported an incidence of 12.6/100,000 person-years when trained neurologists reviewed the data. A population-based study in Germany reported a lifetime prevalence of 0.3%.
Aetiology/ Risk factors
The cause of trigeminal neuralgia remains unclear but the most common hypothesis is that of the ignition theory. More peripheral and central mechanisms may be involved, and trigeminal nerve microstructure may be altered. It is more common in people with multiple sclerosis (RR 20.0, 95% CI 4.1 to 59.0) and stroke. Hypertension is a risk factor in women (RR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.4), but the evidence is less clear for men (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.30 to 4.50).
Prognosis
One retrospective cohort study found no reduction in 10-year survival in people with trigeminal neuralgia. We found no evidence about the natural history of trigeminal neuralgia. However, the TNA Facial Pain Association continues to periodically receive individual isolated reports of people with trigeminal neuralgia who either die from overdose of medications, take their own life, or both. The illness is characterised by recurrences and remissions. Many people have periods of remission with no pain lasting months or years. At least 50% of people with trigeminal neuralgia will have remissions lasting at least 6 months in duration. Collective expert experience suggest that, in many people, trigeminal neuralgia becomes more severe and less responsive to treatment over time, despite increasing medication doses and adding additional agents. Most people with trigeminal neuralgia are initially managed medically, and a proportion eventually have a surgical procedure. We found no good evidence about the proportion of people who require surgical treatment for pain control. Anecdotal evidence indicates that pain relief is better after surgery than with medical treatment. Furthermore, responses from a questionnaire taken by people who had surgery for trigeminal neuralgia indicated that the majority of respondents wished they had surgery earlier.
Aims of intervention
To relieve pain, with minimal adverse effects.
Outcomes
Pain relief: pain frequency and severity scores; psychological distress; ability to perform normal activities; adverse effects.
Methods
Clinical Evidence search and appraisal September 2013. The following databases were used to identify studies for this systematic review: Medline 1966 to September 2013, Embase 1980 to September 2013, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, issue 8 (1966 to date of issue). Additional searches were carried out in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database. We also searched for retractions of studies included in the review. An information specialist identified the titles and abstracts in an initial search, which an evidence scanner then assessed against predefined criteria. An evidence analyst then assessed full texts for potentially relevant studies against predefined criteria. An expert contributor was consulted on studies selected for inclusion. An evidence analyst then extracted all data relevant to the review. Study design criteria for inclusion in this review were: published systematic reviews and RCTs, at least single-blinded and containing more than 10 individuals, of whom more than 80% were followed up. There was no minimum length of follow-up. We included systematic reviews and RCTs where harms on an included intervention were assessed, applying the same study design criteria for inclusion as we did for benefits. In addition, we use a regular surveillance protocol to capture harms alerts from organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which are continually added to the review as required. The contributors have also used results from their own database, collated from 1990 to September 2007, which includes case series reports; further studies after this date have been added to the Comment sections. As Clinical Evidence was unable to perform a second appraisal of results retrieved by the contributor's search, we may have missed studies that could affect our overall assessment of the interventions in this review. As Clinical Evidence reports only systematic reviews and RCTs, studies from the additional searches that did not meet this criteria (e.g., case series reports) are reported in the Comment sections, and not the Benefits and Harms tables of this review. Trigeminal neuralgia is a very painful condition and, therefore, placebo-controlled trials are considered unethical. Trials using active controls have important limitations. The gold-standard drug for treating trigeminal neuralgia is carbamazepine, but it is difficult to be sure that its effects have been totally eliminated before crossover when compared with other drug treatments in trials with crossover designs. This is because carbamazepine alters liver enzymes, and reversal of this takes about 3 weeks. The choice of active control is limited because few drugs have been subjected to high-quality trials. An enhanced, enriched, randomised control trial has been suggested as a method of overcoming these obstacles. Another limitation of trigeminal neuralgia trials is that outcomes for treatment success differ for medical (drug) therapies and surgical interventions. For example, treatment success in medical studies is usually defined as at least 50% pain relief from baseline. However, complete pain relief is the measure of treatment success in surgical studies. To aid readability of the numerical data in our reviews, we round many percentages to the nearest whole number. Readers should be aware of this when relating percentages to summary statistics such as RRs and ORs. We have performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions included in this review (see table). The categorisation of the quality of the evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low) reflects the quality of evidence available for our chosen outcomes in our defined populations of interest. These categorisations are not necessarily a reflection of the overall methodological quality of any individual study, because the Clinical Evidence population and outcome of choice may represent only a small subset of the total outcomes reported, and population included, in any individual trial. For further details of how we perform the GRADE evaluation and the scoring system we use, please see our website (www.clinicalevidence.com).
Table.
GRADE Evaluation of interventions for Trigeminal neuralgia.
| Important outcomes | Ability to perform normal activities, Pain relief, Psychological distress | ||||||||
| Studies (Participants) | Outcome | Comparison | Type of evidence | Quality | Consistency | Directness | Effect size | GRADE | Comment |
| What are the effects of ongoing treatments in people with trigeminal neuralgia? | |||||||||
| 3 (208) | Pain relief | Carbamazepine versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | +2 | Moderate | Quality points deducted for crossover design and short follow-up; directness point deducted for inclusion of different pain severities and uncertainties about diagnostic criteria and outcomes measured; effect-size points added for RR = 5 or higher |
| 1 (48) | Pain relief | Oxcarbazepine versus carbamazepine | 4 | –3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting of results, and no direct comparison between groups |
| 1 (14) | Pain relief | Lamotrigine versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and crossover design with no pre-crossover results; directness point deducted for concurrent use of other medication |
We initially allocate 4 points to evidence from RCTs, and 2 points to evidence from observational studies. To attain the final GRADE score for a given comparison, points are deducted or added from this initial score based on preset criteria relating to the categories of quality, directness, consistency, and effect size. Quality: based on issues affecting methodological rigour (e.g., incomplete reporting of results, quasi-randomisation, sparse data [<200 people in the analysis]). Consistency: based on similarity of results across studies. Directness: based on generalisability of population or outcomes. Effect size: based on magnitude of effect as measured by statistics such as relative risk, odds ratio, or hazard ratio.
Glossary
- Balloon compression
A percutaneous (requiring a needle inserted through the skin of the cheek) neurosurgical procedure carried out at the Gasserian ganglion and/or pre-ganglionic nerve route. The procedure involves using a balloon to press the nerve against bony tissue which causes mechanical nerve destruction (partial nerve damage), and is designed to stop the transmission of pain signals to the brain by selectively damaging the small unmyelinated and small myelinated pain fibres of the trigeminal nerve while ideally sparing the rest of the nerve fibres. This minimally invasive procedure is also known as microcompression.
- CyberKnife® radiosurgery
A non-invasive stereotactic radiosurgery procedure that utlises a robotic arm technology that directs individual doses of radiation onto multiple points on the trigeminal nerve root. The procedure is usually performed with CT scan guidance, without the use of a stereotactic reference frame.
- Gamma Knife® radiosurgery
A minimally invasive stereotactic radiosurgery procedure that utilises a technology that focuses beams of radiation onto a very small spot (isocenter) within the trigeminal nerve root. The procedure is performed with a stereotactic reference frame that is temporarily attached to the head of the person undergoing the procedure, therefore, local anaesthesia is required. The dominant number of studies and volume of clinical outcomes data for stereotactic radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia utilises this technique.
- Gasserian ganglion
Cluster of nerve cells in which the three main branches of the trigeminal nerve meet. Also known as trigeminal ganglion or semilunar ganglion.
- Glycerol rhizolysis
A percutaneous (requiring a needle inserted through the skin of the cheek) neurosurgical procedure that involves using a viscous alcohol called glycerol to damage the Gasserian ganglion and/or pre-ganglionic nerve route. The procedure stops the transmission of pain signals to the brain by causing selective chemical damage to the small unmyelinated and small myelinated pain fibres of the trigeminal nerve while ideally sparing the rest of the nerve fibres. This minimally invasive procedure is also known as percutaneous retrogasserian glycerol rhizolysis.
- LINAC-MLC-based radiosurgery
Non-invasive stereotactic radiosurgery procedures that utilises technologies that focus small high-dose radiation beams onto specific points (focus spot) within the trigeminal nerve root (isocentric treatment). The technologies use a large high-energy linear accelerator (LINAC) x-ray source and have multileaf collimator (MLC) capability. Machines that utilise this technology include Novalis®, Trilogy®, and Truebeam®. The procedures are usually performed with CT scan guidance, without the use of a stereotactic reference frame.
- Microvascular decompression
A neurosurgical (microsurgical) procedure that involves accessing via the posterior fossa the trigeminal nerve just at its point of entry into the brain. Any vessels distorting or in close contact with the nerve are moved out of the way with the aim of avoiding nerve damage and hence preserving function. This procedure requires general anaesthetic. It is the only neurosurgical procedure designed to spare the trigeminal nerve from damage, and to directly address the cause of trigeminal neuralgia in most cases, rather than just relieve the symptom of pain. Results of this procedure vary the most from surgeon to surgeon.
- Moderate-quality evidence
Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
- Non-percutaneous destructive neurosurgical techniques
Neurosurgical procedures that cause destruction (ablation) of specific nerves, but do not require needle insertion through the skin of the cheek (e.g., stereotactic radiosurgery [performed with technologies such as the Gamma Knife®]). Also known as non-percutaneous ablative surgical procedures.
- Percutaneous destructive neurosurgical techniques
Neurosurgical procedures that require needle insertion through the skin of the cheek, and that cause partial destruction (ablation) of the trigeminal nerve by selectively targeting damage to the small unmyelinated and small myelinated pain fibres of the trigeminal nerve, while ideally sparing the rest of the nerve fibres (e.g., radiofrequency thermocoagulation, glycerol rhizolysis, and balloon compression). Also known as percutaneous ablative surgical procedures.
- Radiofrequency thermocoagulation
A percutaneous (requiring a needle inserted through the skin of the cheek) neurosurgical procedure that uses an electrode to damage the Gasserian ganglion and/or pre-ganglionic nerve route. The procedure stops the transmission of pain signals to the brain by selectively damaging the small unmyelinated and small myelinated pain fibres of the trigeminal nerve while ideally sparing the rest of the nerve fibres. This minimally invasive procedure is also known as percutaneous retrogasserian radiofrequency thermocoagulation.
- Stereotactic radiosurgery
A non-percutaneous (does not require needle insertion through the skin of the cheek) neurosurgical procedure that involves using a focused beam of ionising radiation to selectively damage the small unmyelinated and small myelinated pain fibres of the trigeminal nerve, while ideally sparing the rest of the nerve fibres. While several technologies purport similar results (CyberKnife® radiosurgery and other LINAC-MLC-based radiosurgery technologies), the predominant and proven technology for this non-invasive neurosurgical technique is the Gamma Knife®.
- Very low-quality evidence
Any estimate of effect is very uncertain.
Disclaimer
The information contained in this publication is intended for medical professionals. Categories presented in Clinical Evidence indicate a judgement about the strength of the evidence available to our contributors prior to publication and the relevant importance of benefit and harms. We rely on our contributors to confirm the accuracy of the information presented and to adhere to describe accepted practices. Readers should be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. Because of this and regular advances in medical research we strongly recommend that readers' independently verify specified treatments and drugs including manufacturers' guidance. Also, the categories do not indicate whether a particular treatment is generally appropriate or whether it is suitable for a particular individual. Ultimately it is the readers' responsibility to make their own professional judgements, so to appropriately advise and treat their patients. To the fullest extent permitted by law, BMJ Publishing Group Limited and its editors are not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, products liability or otherwise) whether they be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the application of the information in this publication.
Contributor Information
Joanna M. Zakrzewska, Division of Diagnostic, Surgical and Medical Sciences, Eastman Dental Hospital, London, UK.
Mark E. Linskey, Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California.
References
- 1.Headache Classification Cubcommittee of the International Headache Society. The international classification of headache disorders. 3rd ed (beta version). Cephalalgia 2013;33:629–808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Katusic S, Williams DB, Beard CM, et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia and glossopharyngeal neuralgia: similarities and differences, Rochester, Minnesota, 1945–1984. Neuroepidemiology 1991;10:276–281. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Zakrzewska JM. Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia. Clin J Pain 2002;18:14–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Tölle T, Dukes E, Sodosky A. Patient burden of trigeminal neuralgia: results from a cross-sectional survey of health state impairment and treatment patterns in six European countries. Pain Pract 2006;6:153–160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Zakrzewska JM, Padfield D. The patient’s journey through trigeminal neuralgia. Pain: Clinical Updates 2014;22:1–8. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Zakrzewska JM, Hamlyn PJ. Facial pain. In: Crombie IK, Croft PR, Linton SJ, et al, eds. Epidemiology of pain. Seattle: IAS Press, 1999:171–202. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Katusic S, Beard CM, Bergstralh E, et al. Incidence and clinical features of trigeminal neuralgia, Rochester, Minnesota, 1945–1984. Ann Neurol 1990;27:89–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Munoz M, Dumas M, Boutros-Toni F, et al. A neuro-epidemiologic survey in a Limousin town. Rev Neurol (Paris) 1988;144:266–271. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Hall GC, Carroll D, Parry D, et al. Epidemiology and treatment of neuropathic pain: the UK primary care perspective. Pain 2006;122:156–162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Koopman JS, Dieleman JP, Juygen FJ, et al. Incidence of facial pain in the general population. Pain 2009;147:122–127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Mueller D, Obermann M, Yoon MS, et al. Prevalence of trigeminal neuralgia and persistent idiopathic facial pain: a population-based study. Cephalalgia 2011;31:1542–1548. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Devor M, Amir R, Rappaport ZH. Pathophysiology of trigeminal neuralgia: the ignition hypothesis. Clin J Pain 2002;18:4–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Zakrzewska JM. Trigeminal neuralgia. In: Zakrzewska JM, Harrison SD, eds. Assessment and management of orofacial pain, 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Sciences; 2002:267–370. [Google Scholar]
- 14.IObermann M, Yoon MS, Ese D, et al. Impaired trigeminal nociceptive processing in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. Neurology 2007;69:835–841. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.DeSouza DD, Hodaie M, Davis KD. Abnormal trigeminal nerve microstructure and brain white matter in idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Pain 2013;155:37–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Pan SL, Chen LS, Yen MF, et al. Increased risk of stroke after trigeminal neuralgia — a population-based follow-up study. Cephalalgia 2011;31:937–942. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Pan SL, Yen MF, Chiu YH, et al. Increased risk of trigeminal neuralgia after hypertension: a population-based study. Neurology 2011;77:1605–1610. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Rothman KJ, Monson RR. Survival in trigeminal neuralgia. J Chronic Dis 1973;26:303–309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Rushton JG, MacDonald HN. Trigeminal neuralgia: special considerations of nonsurgical treatment. JAMA 1957;165:437–440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Zakrzewska JM, Patsalos PN. Long-term cohort study comparing medical (oxcarbazepine) and surgical management of intractable trigeminal neuralgia. Pain 2002;95:259–266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Zakrzewska JM, Lopez BC, Kim SE, et al. Patient reports of satisfaction after microvascular decompression and partial sensory rhizotomy for trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2005;56:1304–1311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Zakrzewska JM, Palmer J, Elttlin DA, et al. Novel design for a phase IIa placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized withdrawal study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CNV1014802 in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. Trials 2013:14:402. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Wiffen PJ, Derry S, Moore RA, et al. Carbamazepine for acute and chronic pain. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2013. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2010. In addition, 41 medical journals were hand searched for a previous version of this review. Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and by contacting investigators. 21249671 [Google Scholar]
- 24.McQuay H, Carroll D, Jadad AR, et al. Anticonvulsant drugs for management of pain: a systematic review. BMJ 1995;311:1047–1052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Taylor JC, Brauer S, Espir MLE. Long-term treatment of trigeminal neuralgia with carbamazepine. Postgrad Med J 1981;57:16–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Di Stefano G, La Cesa S, Truini A, et al. Natural history and outcome of 200 outpatients with classical trigeminal neuralgia treated with carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine in a tertiary centre for neuropathic pain. J Headache Pain 2014;15:34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Sweetman SC, ed. Martindale: the complete drug reference. 33rd ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Trigeminal neuralgia. Available online at: http://cks.library.nhs.uk/clinical_knowledge/clinical_topics/previous_version/trigeminal_neuralgia.pdf (last accessed 4 September 2007). [Google Scholar]
- 29.National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Neuropathic pain — pharmacological management. The pharmacological management of neuropathic pain in adults in non specialist settings guideline 173. November 2013. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG173 (last accessed 2 July 2014). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The Epilepsies: the diagnosis and management of the epilepsies in adults and children in primary and secondary care. January 2012. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG137 (last accessed 2 July 2014). [Google Scholar]
- 31.Ferrell PB, Jr, McLeod HL. Carbamazepine, HLA-B*1502 and risk of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: US FDA recommendations. Pharmacogenomics 2008;9:1543–1546. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Drug safety update: volume 1, issue 9. April 2008. Available at http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Publications/Safetyguidance/DrugSafetyUpdate/CON014505 (last accessed 14 March 2014). [Google Scholar]
- 33.Liebel JT, Menger N, Langohr H. Oxcarbazepine in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. Nervenheilkunde 2001;20:461–465. [In German] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Beydoun A. Safety and efficacy of oxcarbazepine: results of randomized, double-blind trials. Pharmacotherapy 2000;20:152S–158S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Wiffen P, Derry S, Moore RA. Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2013. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Search date 2011. In addition, 41 medical journals were hand searched. Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and by contacting investigators. 21328280 [Google Scholar]
- 36.Zakrzewska JM, Chaudhry Z, Nurmikko TJ, et al. Lamotrigine (lamictal) in refractory trigeminal neuralgia: results from a double-blind placebo controlled crossover study. Pain 1997;73:223–230. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Leandri M, Lundardi G, Inglese M, et al. Lamotrigine in trigeminal neuralgia secondary to multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2000;247:556–558. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Bittar GT, Graff-Radford SB. The effects of streptomycin/lidocaine block on trigeminal neuralgia: a double blind crossover placebo controlled study. Headache 1993;33:155–160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.De Santi L, Annunziata P. Symptomatic cranial neuralgias in multiple sclerosis: clinical features and treatment. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2012; 114:101–107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Lemos L, Flores S, Oliveira P, et al. Gabapentin supplemented with ropivacain block of trigger points improves pain control and quality of life in trigeminal neuralgia patients when compared with gabapentin alone. Clin J Pain 2008;24:64–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Yang M, Zhou M, He L, et al. Non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2013. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Songs, Ltd. Search date 2011. 21249658 [Google Scholar]
- 42.Zakrzewska JM, Coakham HB. Microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia: update. Curr Opin Neurol 2012;25:296–301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Akram H, Mirza B, Kitchen N, et al. Proposal for evaluating the quality of reports of surgical interventions in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: the Surgical Trigeminal Neuralgia Score. Neurosurg Focus 2013;35:E3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Barker FG 2nd, Jannetta PJ, Bissonette DJ, et al. The long-term outcome of microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1077–1083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Piatt JH Jr, Wilkins RH. Microvascular decompression for tic douloureux. Neurosurgery 1984;15:456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Zakrzewska JM, Thomas DG. Patient's assessment of outcome after three surgical procedures for the management of trigeminal neuralgia. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1993;122:225–230. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.McLaughlin MR, Jannetta PJ, Clyde BL, et al. Microvascular decompression of cranial nerves: lessons learned after 4400 operations. J Neurosurg 1999;90:1–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Linskey ME, Ratanatharathorne V, Penagaricano J. A prospective cohort study of microvascular decompression and Gamma Knife surgery in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. J Neurosurg 2008;109:160–172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Pollock BE,Schoeberl KA. Prospective comparison of posterior fossa exploration and stereotactic radiosurgery dorsal root entry zone target as primary surgery for patients with idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2010;67:633–638. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Sindou M, Mertens P. Microvascular decompression (MVD) in trigeminal and glosso-vago-pharyngeal neuralgias. A twenty year experience. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1993;58(Suppl):168-170. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Ariai MS, Mallory GW, Pollock BE. Outcomes after microvascular decompression for patients with trigeminal neuralgia and suspected multiple sclerosis. World Neurosurg 2014;81:599–603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Broggi G, Ferroli P, Franzini A, et al. Operative findings and outcomes of microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia in 35 patients affected by multiple sclerosis. Neurosurgery 2004;55:830–838. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Sandell T, Eide PK. The effect of microvascular decompression in patients with multiple sclerosis and trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2010;67:749–753. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Lopez BC, Hamlyn PJ, Zakrzewska JM. Systematic review of ablative neurosurgical techniques for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2004;54:973–982. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Lim JNW, Ayiku L. The clinical efficacy and safety of stereotactic radiosurgery (gamma knife) in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. 2004. Available online at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/ip/173systematicreview.pdf (last accessed 4 September2007). Search date 2004; primary sources Biosis, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR), The Cochrane Library, CRD Databases (DARE, NHS EED, HTA), Current Controlled Trials, Embase, Medical Research Council (MRC) Clinical Trials Register, Medline, National Research Register, PreMedline, Science Citation Index, and TRIP Database. [Google Scholar]
- 56.Lopez BC, Hamlyn PJ, Zakrzewska JM, et al. Stereotactic radiosurgery for primary trigeminal neuralgia: state of the evidence and recommendations for future reports. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 2004;75:1019–1024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Zakrzewska JM, Akram H. Neurosurgical interventions for the treatment of classical trigeminal neuralgia. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 8, 2013. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Flickinger JC, Pollock BE, Kondziolka D, et al. Does increased nerve length within the treatment volume improve trigeminal neuralgia radiosurgery? A prospective double-blind, randomized study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51:449–454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Régis J, Metellus P, Hayashi M, et al. Prospective controlled trial of gamma knife surgery for essential trigeminal neuralgia. J Neurosurg 2006;104:913–924. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Tuleasca C, Carron R, Ressequier N, et al. Multiple sclerosis-related trigeminal neuralgia: a prospective series of 43 patients treated with Gamma Knife surgery with more than 1 year of follow-up. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2014;92:203–210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Weller M, Marshall K, Lovato JF, et al. Single-institution retrospective series of gamma knife radiosurgery in the treatment of multiple sclerosis-related trigeminal neuralgia: factors that predict efficacy. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2014;92:53–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Zorro O, Lobato-Polo J, Kano H, et al. Gamma knife radiosurgery for multiple sclerosis-related trigeminal neuralgia. Neurology 2009;73:1149–1154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Park KJ, Kondziolka D, Berkowitz O, et al. Repeat gamma knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2012;70:295–305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Kimball BY, Sorenson JM, Cunningham D. Repeat Gamma Knife surgery for trigeminal neuralgia: long-term results. J Neurosurg 2010;113(suppl):178–183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Aubuchon AC, Chan MD, Lovato JF, et al. Repeat gamma knife radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;81:1059–1065. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Pollock BE, Foote RL, Link MJ, et al. Repeat radiosurgery for idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:192–195. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Udupi BP, Chouhan RS, Dash HH, et al. Comparative evaluation of percutaneous retrogasserian glycerol rhizolysis and radiofrequency thermocoagulation techniques in the management of trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2012;70:407–412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Erdine S, Ozyalcin NS, Cimen A, et al. Comparison of pulsed radiofrequency with conventional radiofrequency in the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Eur J Pain 2007;11:309–313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Li X, Ni J, Yang L, et al. A prospective study of Gasserian ganglion pulsed radiofrequency combined with continuous radiofrequency for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. J Clin Neurosci 2012;19:824–828. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Broggi G, Franzini A, Lasio G, et al. Long-term results of percutaneous retrogasserion thermorhizotomy for 'essential' trigeminal neuralgia: considerations in 1000 consecutive patients. Neurosurgery 1990;26:783–787. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Kanpolat Y, Savas A, Bekar A, et al. Percutaneous controlled radiofrequency trigeminal rhizotomy for the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia: 25-year experience in 1,600 patients. Neurosurgery 2001;48:524–534. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Nugent GR. Technique and results of 800 percutaneous radiofrequency thermocoagulations for trigeminal neuralgia. Appl Neurophysiol 1982;45:504–507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Taha JM, Tew JM Jr. Comparison of surgical treatments for trigeminal neuralgia: reevaluation of radiofrequency rhizotomy. Neurosurgery 1996;38:865–871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD. Percutaneous retrogasserian glycerol rhizotomy for trigeminal neuralgia: technique and expectations. Neurosurg Focus 2005;18:E7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Pollock BE. Percutaneous retrogasserian glycerol rhizotomy for patients with idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia: a prospective analysis of factors related to pain relief. J Neurosurg 2005;102:223–228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.North RB, Kidd DH, Piantadosi S, et al. Percutaneous retrogasserion glycerol rhizotomy. Predictors of success and failure in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. J Neurosurg 1990;72:851–856. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Young RF. Glycerol rhizolysis for treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. J Neurosurg 1988;69:39–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Lichtor T, Mullan JF. A 10-year follow-up review of percutaneous microcompression of the trigeminal ganglion. J Neurosurg 1990;72:49–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Baabor MG, Perez-Limonte L. Percutaneous balloon compression of the gasserian ganglion for the treatment of trigeminalneuralgia: personal experience of 206 patients. Acta Neurochir Suppl 2011;108:251–254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Kouzounias K, Schechtmann G, Lind G, et al. Factors that influence outcome of percutaneous balloon compression in the treatment oftrigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery. 2010;67:925–934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Brown JA. Percutaneous balloon compression for trigeminal neuralgia. Clin Neurosurg 2009;56:73–78. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Chen JF, Tu PH, Lee ST. Repeated percutaneous balloon compression for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia: a long-term study. World Neurosurg 2012;77:352–356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Bender M, Pradilla G, Batra S, et al. Effectiveness of repeat glycerol rhizotomy in treating recurrent trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2012;70:1125–1133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Mohammad-Mohammadi A,Recinos PF, Lee JH, et al. Surgical outcomes of trigeminal neuralgia in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurosurgery 2013;73:941–950. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Mallory GW, Atkinson JL, Stien KJ, et al. Outcomes after percutaneous surgery for patients with multiple sclerosis-related trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2012;71:581-586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]