Efficacy of Second Operation for Hemifacial Spasm Within 1 Week After Ineffective Microvascular Decompression

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of the second operation within 1 week after ineffective microvascular decompression (MVD) for patients with primary hemifacial spasm (HFS), and to find out the causes of failure. Methods: The surgery records and postoperative follow-ups of 52 primary HFS patients who had poor relief of spasm after their first MVDs were investigated. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A included 46 patients (16 males and 30 females) that went through the second operation within 1 week after the failure of the first MVD. Group B included 6 patients (3 males and 3 females) which did not take the reoperation. The level of spasm of each patient was then re-evaluated 1 year after the first surgery. Results: Among 52 patients who had poor relief after the first MVD between April 2016 and October 2019, 46 patients underwent a second MVD within 1 week while 6 patients refused to take the reoperation. Their mean duration of HFS was 102.4 ± 57.9 months. During reoperations for patients in group A, we discovered additional sites of neurovascular compression in 11 cases (23.91%). Forty-five patients (97.82%) in group A achieved complete relief 1 year after the second surgery while there was 1 recurrent case. Four patients (66.67%) in group B achieved delayed relief 1 year after the first surgery, while the other 2 patients were still suffering facial spasm in the 1-year follow-up. Group A demonstrated higher relief rate compared to group B in the 1 year follow up (P = 0.032). Although no severe complications occurred on patients in both group, 4 of them suffered grade II facial palsy, and another 3 patients had developed mild temporary hearing loss on the operation side. Conclusion: The second operation within 1 week after an ineffective MVD is safe and effective. Full revealing of root exit zone and making sure no neurovascular compression missed with abnormal muscle response monitoring are the keys to a successful MVD.

[1]  Fang Li,et al.  Clinical analysis of microvascular decompression in patients with hemifacial spasm: a retrospective study. , 2020, Annals of palliative medicine.

[2]  Kwan Park,et al.  Missed Culprits in Failed Microvascular Decompression Surgery for Hemifacial Spasm and Expenses for Redo Surgery. , 2019, World neurosurgery.

[3]  Heng Zhang,et al.  Prognosis of Symptoms and Complications After Microvascular Decompression for Hemifacial Spasm: A Single-Center Experience. , 2018, World neurosurgery.

[4]  M. Sindou,et al.  Microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm : Surgical techniques and intraoperative monitoring. , 2018, Neuro-Chirurgie.

[5]  M. Sindou,et al.  Microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm: Outcome on spasm and complications. A review. , 2018, Neuro-Chirurgie.

[6]  J. Zhong,et al.  What Should We Do for Those Hemifacial Spasm Patients Without Efficacy Following Microvascular Decompression: Expectation of Delayed Relief or Early Reoperation? , 2017, World neurosurgery.

[7]  B. Son,et al.  Intraoperative monitoring of Z-L response (ZLR) and abnormal muscle response (AMR) during microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm. Interpreting the role of ZLR , 2018, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[8]  Shi-ting Li,et al.  Electromyographically Guided Nerve Combing Makes Microvascular Decompression More Successful in Hemifacial Spasm with Persistent Abnormal Muscle Response. , 2017, World neurosurgery.

[9]  Shi-ting Li,et al.  Factors Promoting a Good Outcome in a Second Microvascular Decompression Operation When Hemifacial Spasm is Not Relieved After the Initial Operation. , 2017, World neurosurgery.

[10]  A. Kaufmann,et al.  Failed microvascular decompression surgery for hemifacial spasm due to persistent neurovascular compression: an analysis of reoperations. , 2016, Journal of neurosurgery.

[11]  N. Chaudhry,et al.  Hemifacial spasm: The past, present and future , 2015, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[12]  W. Liang,et al.  Clinical analysis of hemifacial spasm patients with delay symptom relief after microvascular decompression of distinct offending vessels , 2015, Acta Neurologica Belgica.

[13]  D. Kong,et al.  Microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm: long-term outcome and prognostic factors, with emphasis on delayed cure , 2013, Neurosurgical Review.

[14]  Shi-ting Li,et al.  A clinical analysis on microvascular decompression surgery in a series of 3000 cases , 2012, Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery.

[15]  L. Miller,et al.  Safety and effectiveness of microvascular decompression for treatment of hemifacial spasm: a systematic review , 2012, British journal of neurosurgery.

[16]  S. Bhatia,et al.  Utility of intraoperative electromyography in microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm: a meta-analysis. , 2009, Neurosurgical focus.

[17]  J. Engh,et al.  Repeat microvascular decompression for hemifacial spasm , 2005, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

[18]  Shogo Tokudome,et al.  Microscopic measurement of the facial nerve root exit zone from central glial myelin to peripheral Schwann cell myelin. , 2003, Journal of neurosurgery.

[19]  E. Eskandar,et al.  Microvascular Decompression Surgery in the United States, 1996 to 2000: Mortality Rates, Morbidity Rates, and the Effects of Hospital and Surgeon Volumes , 2003, Neurosurgery.

[20]  Dirk De Ridder,et al.  Is the Root Entry/Exit Zone Important in Microvascular Compression Syndromes? , 2002, Neurosurgery.

[21]  S. Yi,et al.  Botulinum a toxin treatment of hemifacial spasm and blepharospasm. , 1993, Journal of Korean medical science.

[22]  J. W. House,et al.  Facial Nerve Grading System , 1985, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.