ReviewThe journal of international advanced otology2022
Midline Facial Nerve Monitoring: Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature.
Review in The journal of international advanced otology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extratemporal Facial Nerve Interconnections and Trunk's Variability: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFacial nerve monitoring system has enabled facial muscle activity detection using electrodes placed over the target muscles. In an effort to enable the best and minimally invasive surgical approach, a midline facial nerve monitor was applied during bilateral cochlear implantation surgical intervention in our center and the feasibility of placing midline facial nerve monitor electrodes during bilateral cochlear implantation operations was evaluated.
methodsThe medical records and operative notes of all patients who underwent bilateral cochlear implantation surgery between January 2017 and April 2018 in a quaternary care center were retrospectively reviewed and divided into 2 groups based on the facial nerve monitoring methods: facial nerve monitoring with the midline (midline facial nerve monitor) or bilateral (bilateral facial nerve monitor) electrode placements. Basic demographic information, comorbidities, and facial nerve status (pre- and postoperatively) were collected from patient electronic medical charts. The operative notes were reviewed for abnormal facial nerve findings, as well as for any reported difficulties with the identification or stimulation of facial nerve. The primary outcome was facial nerve identification postoperative function.
resultsSeventy-eight patients met our inclusion criteria. Midline facial nerve monitor was used in 49 patients and bilateral facial nerve monitor was used in 29 patients. No documented difficulty was identified at the step of facial nerve identification in either group, and none of the patients developed facial nerve weakness postoperatively.
conclusionMidline facial nerve monitor is a safe and reliable method that can be used in bilateral cochlear implantation surgeries and other surgeries requiring facial nerve monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.