ArticleScientific reports2025
Endoscopic microvascular decompression for primary trigeminal neuralgia: surgical experience and early outcomes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- How I do it: Endoscopic microvascular decompression with vertebral artery transposition for trigeminal neuralgia caused by vertebrobasilar dolichoectasia.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- The Added Value of Endoscopic Micro-Inspection in Microvascular Decompression for Trigeminal Neuralgia and Hemifacial Spasm: Literature Review and Single-Center Experience.Neurology international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and early outcomes of endoscopic microvascular decompression (MVD) for primary trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and provide clinical experience for the application of full endoscopic techniques in MVD surgery.
methodsThis study retrospectively collected medical records of patients who underwent microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery at our institution between January 2020 and January 2023. According to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 137 patients were ultimately included in the study. To evaluate the severity of facial pain in these patients, we utilized the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) pain intensity rating system. Additionally, this study analyzed and compared the clinical outcomes of MVD procedures performed endoscopically versus those performed under microscopy.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences between endoscopic and microscopic microvascular decompression (MVD) in terms of postoperative hospital stay, recurrence rate, complication incidence, and surgical duration (P > 0.05). However, regarding the efficacy of treatment, the effectiveness rate after endoscopic MVD was superior to that of microscopic MVD, with a statistically significant difference observed between the two groups (P < 0.05).
conclusionEndoscopic microvascular decompression (MVD) for primary trigeminal neuralgia is a safe and effective treatment, with the critical success factor being the accurate localization of the vessel compressing the nerve. Compared to traditional microscopic MVD, endoscopic MVD shows superior postoperative outcomes, offering wide-angle and multi-angle views along with close-up inspection capabilities. However, it requires attention to overcoming limitations such as a lack of stereoscopic vision and potential blind spots.
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.