ArticleJournal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base2026
Pitfalls in Trigeminal Nerve Mapping in Neurosurgery: The Mystery of the Unexpected Motor Responses.
Article in Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Intraoperative neurophysiological mapping can help identify the trigeminal nerve (TN) during surgeries where it is at risk. Low-stimulating currents may only recruit sensory branch stimulation and trigger reflex responses, potentially complicating interpretation during monitoring. This report aims to address this issue by examining cases to categorize TN responses in relation to varying stimulation intensities, identify stimulation patterns, and clarify common response characteristics in surgical contexts. Methods: Seven cerebellopontine (CP) angle surgery cases with TN exposure were studied. Concentric bipolar stimulation was applied over the TN from 0.05 to 4 mA, and responses were recorded from various muscles innervated by the cranial nerves under monitoring (V, VII, IX, X, XI, XII). Results: Low stimulation currents (particularly below 0.5 mA) may elicit reflex responses over hypoglossal and facial innervated muscles, more often than motor responses, when the TN is stimulated. Conclusion: A stimulation protocol starting at 0.05 mA and increasing to at least 1 mA or until compound muscle action potentials are observed in trigeminally innervated muscles is recommended for accurate TN mapping in CP angle surgery. These results may be helpful to avoid misinterpreting reflex responses in non-TN-innervated muscles.
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.