Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025
Microvascular Decompression: Salient Surgical Principles and Technical Nuances
Published on: July 5, 2011
Endoscopic microvascular decompression versus microscopic microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia: A
Lulu Chen1, Yuchun Shang1, Yesen Zhang1
1Department of Neurosurgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu 233000, China.
Background:
To compare the efficacy and safety of full endoscopic or endoscope-assisted microvascular decompression (E-MVD) and microscopic microvascular decompression (M-MVD) for primary trigeminal neuralgia (TN).
Methods:
We systematically searched the online database, including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. The search terms used included, but were not limited to, "Trigeminal Neuralgia", "Microvascular Decompression Surgery" and "Endoscope". Postoperative facial pain relief and postoperative complications were considered for meta-analysis. All the outcomes were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals using R language.
Results:
A total of three studies involving 442 (E-MVD [218] versus M-MVD [224]) patients were included for analysis in our study. Postoperative facial pain relief (very much improved or much improved) was no difference between the two groups (OR, 0.95;95% CI, 0.57-1.58; I2 = 0%; p = 0.83). In addition, the occurrence of some postoperative complications was not statistically different between the two groups, including CSFleak (OR, 1.35;95% CI, 0.16-11.13; I2 = 0%; p = 0.94), facial paralysis (OR, 0.26;95% CI, 0.03-2.54; I2 = 0%; p = 0.67), hearing loss (OR, 0.87;95% CI, 0.30-2.55; I2 = 32%; p = 0.22), facial numbness (OR, 1.03;95% CI, 0.56-1.87; I2 = 62%; p = 0.10).
Conclusions:
Both endoscopic microvascular decompression and microscopic microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia appear to provide patients with equivalent facial pain relief outcomes. Complication rates were also similar between the groups.
