Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37190495›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2023

Outcome Comparison of Drug-Resistant Trigeminal Neuralgia Surgical Treatments-An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews.

Alessandro Rapisarda, Marco Battistelli, Alessandro Izzo, Manuela D'Ercole, Quintino Giorgio D'Alessandris, Filippo Maria Polli, Samuele Santi, Renata Martinelli, Nicola Montano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Trigeminal neuralgia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alessandro RapisardaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Marco BattistelliDepartment of Neuroscience, Neurosurgery Section, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Alessandro IzzoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Manuela D'ErcoleDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Quintino Giorgio D'AlessandrisDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2953-9291
Filippo Maria PolliDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Samuele SantiDepartment of Neuroscience, Neurosurgery Section, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Renata MartinelliDepartment of Neuroscience, Neurosurgery Section, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Nicola MontanoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4965-1950

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical treatment for trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is not always a feasible option due to a lack of full response or adverse effects. Open surgery or percutaneous procedures are advocated in these cases. Several articles have compared the results among different techniques. Nevertheless, the findings of these studies are heterogeneous. Umbrella reviews are studies sitting at the peak of the evidence pyramid. With this umbrella review, we provided a systematic review of the outcomes of the surgical procedures used for TN treatment. Only systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included following the PRISMA guidelines. Ten articles were enrolled for qualitative and quantitative assessment. Level of evidence was quantified using a specific tool (AMSTAR-2). Results were heterogenous in terms of outcome and measurements. Microvascular decompression (MVD) appeared to be the most effective procedure both in the short-term (pain relief in 85-96.6% of cases) and long-term follow-up (pain relief in 64-79% of cases), although showed the highest rate of complications. The results of percutaneous techniques were similar but radiosurgery showed the highest variation in term of pain relief and a higher rate of delayed responses. The use of the AMSTAR-2 tool to quantify the evidence level scored three studies as critically low and seven studies as low-level, revealing a lack of good quality studies on this topic. Our umbrella review evidenced the need of well-designed comparative studies and the utilization of validated scales in order to provide more homogenous data for pooled-analyses and meta-analyses in the field of TN surgical treatment.

Indexed as

microvascular decompressionpercutaneous proceduresradiosurgerytrigeminal neuralgiaumbrella review

Identifiers

PMID37190495
PMCPMC10137121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.