ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
Efficacy of microvascular decompression in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: a retrospective Single-Center study of 28 cases.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and patient satisfaction associated with microvascular decompression (MVD) in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN), and to identify clinical and surgical factors associated with postoperative outcomes and TN recurrence.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study included 28 patients with TN who underwent MVD between 2018 and 2025. Data on demographics, TN subtype, preoperative imaging, prior treatments, surgical findings, use of Teflon suture, and complications were analyzed. Outcomes were assessed using the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) Pain Intensity Scale at early postoperative and follow-up stages. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to assess pain-free intervals. Patient satisfaction was evaluated based on willingness to undergo the surgery again.
resultsClassical TN was diagnosed in 75% of patients. Preoperative MRI correctly predicted the presence of a conflict in 20 of 26 patients who actually had one (76.9%). Immediate postoperative pain relief (BNI I-II) was achieved in 85.7% of patients, and recurrence occurred in 16.7% of initially pain-free individuals. The average pain-free period was 28.5 ± 29.4 months. The use of a Teflon suture did not significantly affect recurrence or outcome. Major complications occurred in 10.7% of cases and included CSF leak from the surgical wound, neuroinfection and hematoma. Patient satisfaction was high, with 82% stating they would choose to undergo MVD again. Better outcomes were significantly associated with classical TN subtype. No significant associations were found with age, sex, prior gamma knife therapy, or Teflon fixation technique.
conclusionsin our cohort MVD was a highly effective and well-tolerated treatment for TN, particularly in classical cases, offering high rates of long-term pain relief and patient satisfaction. Complications were rare in our cohort. Outcomes were not influenced by Teflon suture use or demographic factors, supporting the role of MVD as a first-line surgical option in appropriate candidates. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40839306What 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.