Microvascular decompression (MVD) has been widely accepted as the most effective remedy for hyperactive cranial rhizopathy, such as hemifacial spasm and trigeminal neuralgia.[1,2] With popularization of this surgery around the world, numerous neurosurgeons have presented their opinions concerning operative skills. For instance, some authors stated that the point of this process is to detach rather than to isolate the neurovascular confliction with Teflon insertion between them.[3] It has been believed that “transposition” is better than “interposition”.[4] In order to achieve an utter separation, “sling technique” has been frequently reported nowadays.[5] Regardless of varied techniques, however, we should always put safety first while performing this functional neurosurgery. It is imaginable that the more complicated technique is employed, the more instruments or foreign bodies invade the surgical field, the more time elapses, and the more chances of postoperative complications incur eventually. Actually, this MVD operation could have been completed in a more easy and simple fashion. After accomplishment of more than 10,000 MVDs in our center,[6,7] we have learned to go through the operation with minimal procedures in less time. In this paper, the author advanced a strategy of “three noes” for a safe and effective MVD.
No complicated technique
We noticed that the sling technique has become fashionable recently in the literature.[8] In such a small surgical field, however, while the surgeon is concentrating on these procedures of passing a thread around the artery and then stitching and knotting, those surrounding delicate structures, such as facial and vestibulocochlear nerves as well as petrosal veins, are actually in jeopardy. Especially, when the needle is penetrating the petrous dura or the tentorium, a burst may be inevitable at the moment—that's really dangerous.[9] Lately, some authors do have improved the technique, for example, the thread was replaced by Teflon or other materials and no stitching or knotting was needed when glue or clip was adopted.[10,11] Whatever, it still consumes more time to finish these extra procedures while the cerebellum needs to be retracted with a spatula. Actually, a satisfactory exposure could have achieved by efficient dissection instead of retraction. In our experience, even a dolichoectatic vertebrobasilar complex could be moved away without sling. With the arachnoid being opened thoroughly, the cerebellar hemisphere could be raised enough to expose the brainstem very medially. As this wider exposure is achieved, gelfoams or Teflon waddings can be easily inserted between the vertebral artery and the medulla piece by piece from low towards tentorium. When the rostral facial nerve root is reached, it would be found that the artery has been mobilized laterally and proximally without tension. Compared with a distal pull (sling), this proximal push is easier to keep the arterial transposition without rebound.[12–16] Accordingly, it is worth spending time in dissecting caudal nerves instead of slinging a tortuous vertebral artery laterally. Especially in most hemifacial spasm (HFS) cases, this caudal and medial dissection is essential to expose the neurovascular conflict.
No unnecessary instrument
The decompression process can be completed merely by means of a microdissector and a microsuction under coordinating control of the operator's both hands.[6] We never use forceps to move arteries for clamping may give rise to vasospasm. Even the Teflon could be advanced to position without forceps. It could be delivered directly by a microdissector with a small ball of soft Teflon sticking on the tip. The placement should be carried out piece by piece for a bulk of Teflon may block the line of sight and inadvertently push the vessel behind towards the nerve instead. Besides, the emplacement should be managed to avoid the very conflict site. It has been attested that a granuloma developed at the site could be a new culprit accounting for the recurrence.[17–19] Therefore, as long as the offending artery can be kept detaching from the nerve following an appropriate dissection, the Teflon could be waived even. Retracting blades are also unnecessary because a narrow suction tip on a padding cottonoid actually affords more room than a wider spatula does at the moment when a local area is being dissected.
No waste manipulation
It is suggested that the MVD process should be completed promptly for the odds of complications growing over time. However, it is not alluded to finish the operation rashly, instead every single step should be performed very efficiently and properly.[6] If the dissection was not started from the lower nerves until a blocked flocculus was encountered, extra time had elapsed in the redundant manipulation. Generally, with a merely caudal dissection, the conflict is discovered in most HFS cases and no further rostral exposure is needed [Figure 1].[20–23] While in the trigeminal cases, those annoying petrosal veins are detoured with dissection starting from the VIII root instead of from the tentorium.[24] If a good angle is still unavailable in this approach, opening the cerebellar fissures offers a better exposure.[25] Besides, those pre-microscopic procedures should not be ignored. If you neglected them until you realize that the patient's shoulder hampers your arm to access the surgical field or the craniectomy confines lateral exposure, you have to remove the microscope and adjust the position or take out more bone with rongeur again. This halt not only consumes time but also upsets your operation. That is why a Chinese idiom says: “sharpening an axe will not hold up your work of cutting firewood”.
Figure 1.

A from-caudal-to-rostral approach to the neurovascular conflict. In most hemifacial spasm cases, the neurovascular conflict is located in the caudal REZ of the facial nerve (VII)—sometimes, even much more inferiomedially than you expected. So, it is wise to start dissection from the lower level medially. In this case, the offending artery (a) had been already mobilized proximally after caudal dissection. REZ: Root exit zone; VII: Facial nerve; VIII: Vestibulocochlear nerve; IX: Glossopharyngeal nerve.
Conclusion
A successful MVD lies in a prompt identification of the neurovascular conflict, which hinges on a good exposure. A satisfactory working space can be achieved by an appropriate positioning of the patient and a proper craniectomy as well as a rational approach (from caudal to rostral). With a thorough dissection of arachnoids, the cerebellum can be raised enough to expose more medially without retracting. In most cases, the offending artery can be pushed away proximally without adoption of complicated techniques. To keep the neurovascular separation, less Teflon is encouraged to place beyond the conflict. Ultimately, the most important thing should be safety, of course. To balance cure versus safety, this process should be completed promptly with minimal interference to the brain—the simpler the better!
Conflicts of interest
None.
Footnotes
How to cite this article: Zhong J. The simpler the better: a personal philosophy of microvascular decompression surgery. Chin Med J 2021;134:410–412. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001233
References
- 1.Jannetta PJ, McLaughlin MR, Casey KF. Technique of microvascular decompression. Technical note. Neurosurg Focus 2005; 18:E5.doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-7366-9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.McLaughlin MR, Jannetta PJ, Clyde BL, Subach BR, Comey CH, Resnick DK. Microvascular decompression of cranial nerves: lessons learned after 4400 operations. J Neurosurg 1999; 90:1–8. doi: 10.3171/jns.1999.90.1.0001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Yang XS, Li ST, Zhong J, Zhu J, Du Q, Zhou QM, et al. Microvascular decompression on patients with trigeminal neuralgia caused by ectatic vertebrobasilar artery complex: technique notes. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2012; 154:793–797. discussion 797. doi: 10.1007/s00701-012-1320-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Nonaka Y, Hayashi N, Matsumae M, Fukushima T. Wedge-technique for transposition of the vertebral artery in microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm: technical nuances and surgical outcomes. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161:1435–1442. doi: 10.1007/s00701-018-03793-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Khoo HM, Yoshimine T, Taki T. A “sling swing transposition” technique with pedicled dural flap for microvascular decompression in hemifacial spasm. Neurosurgery 2012; 71:25–30. discussion 30-31. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e318246aa74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Zhong J, Zhu J, Sun H, Dou NN, Wang YN, Ying TT, et al. Microvascular decompression surgery: surgical principles and technical nuances based on 4000 cases. Neurol Res 2014; 36:882–893. doi: 10.1179/1743132814Y.0000000344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Li ST, Zhong J, Sekula RF. Microvascular Decompression Surgery. Netherlands: Springer; 2016. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Steinberg JA, Sack J, Wilson B, Weingarten D, Carter B, Khalessi A, et al. Tentorial sling for microvascular decompression in patients with trigeminal neuralgia: a description of operative technique and clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg 2018; 130:1–6. doi: 10.3171/2017.10.JNS17971. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Zhong J. An ideal microvascular decompression technique should be simple and safe. Neurosurg Rev 2012; 35:137–140. author reply 140. doi: 10.1007/s10143-011-0366-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Liu J, Chen Z, Feng T, Jiang B, Yuan Y, Yu Y. Biomedical glue sling technique in microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia caused by atherosclerotic vertebrobasilar artery: a description of operative technique and clinical outcomes. World Neurosurg 2019; 128:e74–e80. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Jha RT, Kumar J, Pressman E, Agazzi S. Arterial sling decompression for hemifacial spasm. World Neurosurg 2019; 132:134.doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Zhong J, Zhu J, Li ST, Guan HX. Microvascular decompressions in patients with coexistent hemifacial spasm and trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurgery 2011; 68:916–920. discussion 920. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e318208f5ac. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Zhong J, Li ST, Zhu J, Guan HX, Zhou QM, Jiao W, et al. A clinical analysis on microvascular decompression surgery in a series of 3000 cases. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2012; 114:846–851. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2012.01.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Jiao W, Zhong J, Sun H, Zhu J, Zhou QM, Yang XS, et al. Microvascular decompression for the patient with painful tic convulsif after Bell palsy. J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24:e286–289. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31828f2b39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Wang YN, Dou NN, Zhou QM, Jiao W, Zhu J, Zhong J, et al. Treatment of hemimasticatory spasm with microvascular decompression. J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24:1753–1755. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e318295025a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Wang YN, Zhong J, Zhu J, Dou NN, Xia L, Visocchi M, et al. Microvascular decompression in patients with coexistent trigeminal neuralgia, hemifacial spasm and glossopharyngeal neuralgia. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014; 156:1167–1171. doi: 10.1007/s00701-014-2034-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Dou NN, Zhong J, Liu MX, Xia L, Sun H, Li B, et al. Teflon might be a factor accounting for a failed microvascular decompression in hemifacial spasm: a technical note. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2016; 94:154–158. doi: 10.1159/000446192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Zhong J, Zhu J, Li ST, Li XY, Wang XH, Yang M, et al. An analysis of failed microvascular decompression in patients with hemifacial spasm: focused on the early reoperative findings. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2010; 152:2119–2123. doi: 10.1007/s00701-010-0794-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Kondo A, Akiyama O, Suzuki M, Arai H. Prosthetic material degeneration over time as a possible factor in delayed recurrence of hemifacial spasm after successful microvascular decompression. Surg Neurol Int 2018; 9:187.doi: 10.4103/sni.sni_146_18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Zhu J, Li ST, Zhong J, Guan HX, Ying TT, Yang M, et al. Role of arterioles in management of microvascular decompression in patients with hemifacial spasm. J Clin Neurosci 2012; 19:375–379. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2011.04.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Zhong J, Xia L, Dou NN, Ying TT, Zhu J, Liu MX, et al. Delayed relief of hemifacial spasm after microvascular decompression: can it be avoided? Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2015; 157:93–98. discussion 98-99. doi: 10.1007/s00701-014-2247-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Xia L, Zhong J, Zhu J, Dou NN, Liu MX, Li ST. Delayed relief of hemifacial spasm after microvascular decompression. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26:408–410. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000001406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Sindou M, Mercier P. Microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm: surgical techniques and intraoperative monitoring. Neurochirurgie 2018; 64:133–143. doi: 10.1016/j.neuchi.2018.04.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhong J, Li ST, Xu SQ, Wan L, Wang X. Management of petrosal veins during microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia. Neurol Res 2008; 30:697–700. doi: 10.1179/174313208X289624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Zhu J, Zhong J, Jiao W, Zhou QM, Guan HX, Dou NN, et al. Via-cerebellar-fissures approach for microvascular decompression of trigeminal nerve. J Craniofac Surg 2014; 25:1438–1440. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000000780. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
