柴開(kāi)君 李晉虎 劉曉東
三叉神經(jīng)痛(trigeminal neuralgia,TN)是指在三叉神經(jīng)分布區(qū)域發(fā)作性的電擊樣劇烈疼痛。雖然目前藥物治療(如卡馬西平)是一線(xiàn)治療方法,但對(duì)于耐藥性差或不能忍受藥物副作用的患者來(lái)說(shuō),手術(shù)干預(yù)的治療方法也是極為有效的,包括微血管減壓術(shù)(microvascular decompression,MVD)、經(jīng)皮射頻熱凝術(shù)(percutaneous radiofrequency rhizotomy,PRR)、經(jīng)皮球囊壓迫術(shù)(percutaneous balloon compression,PBC)、立體定向放射外科治療(stereotactic radiosurgery,SRS)等?,F(xiàn)回顧性分析各種手術(shù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和優(yōu)勢(shì)。
MVD是一種從TN病因著手的非破壞性手術(shù)方案,通過(guò)分離壓迫三叉神經(jīng)根的責(zé)任血管,從而起到控制疼痛的作用。MVD可以有效控制疼痛,術(shù)后1周疼痛控制率在80.3%~96.0%,5年內(nèi)為72%~85%,10年內(nèi)的隨訪(fǎng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)70%的患者疼痛完全緩解,4%需要口服藥物控制,甚至15年后仍有73.4%的患者可以很好控制疼痛[1-3]。典型TN患者的MVD成功率最高[4]。非典型TN患者可能由于神經(jīng)受壓較久、軸索損傷等基礎(chǔ)神經(jīng)損傷或者神經(jīng)纖維敏感性增高乃至腦細(xì)胞自發(fā)性放電等原因引起疼痛,導(dǎo)致手術(shù)療效較差。對(duì)于由間斷疼痛發(fā)作成持續(xù)疼痛的典型TN患者,MVD也有顯著療效[4,5]。Broggi等[6]對(duì)10例多發(fā)性硬化患者行MVD治療,平均隨訪(fǎng)2年,僅有5例患者完全緩解疼痛,1例患者需要藥物維持。
由于MVD比其他TN外科手術(shù)更具有侵入性,因此對(duì)治療老年患者的安全性和有效性需要斟酌。Ashkan等[7]比較年齡≥60歲和<60歲的2組患者行MVD手術(shù)的治療效果,發(fā)現(xiàn)雖然2組初始疼痛緩解率(>95%)相同,但≥60歲的患者復(fù)發(fā)時(shí)間較短。老年患者血管彈性差、血液黏稠度高,甚至可能伴有不同程度的動(dòng)脈粥樣硬化,對(duì)術(shù)中操作和分離血管神經(jīng)造成困難,進(jìn)而影響手術(shù)療效。術(shù)中由于巖靜脈、基底動(dòng)脈及巖骨突出等遮擋三叉神經(jīng),導(dǎo)致血管神經(jīng)壓迫關(guān)系顯示不清,國(guó)內(nèi)外均考慮通過(guò)內(nèi)窺鏡解決,發(fā)現(xiàn)隱匿的責(zé)任血管,從而降低復(fù)發(fā)率[8]。
行MVD或其他外科手術(shù)治療后復(fù)發(fā)的患者可以再次行MVD手術(shù),雖然疼痛緩解率可能低于初次行MVD手術(shù)的患者,但仍有90.3%~93.3%的患者術(shù)后即刻緩解疼痛,1年的有效率為67%,10年為42%[9]。曾接受過(guò)射頻消融手術(shù)的患者再行MVD術(shù)的預(yù)后較差,平均隨訪(fǎng)5.1年顯示有效率為64%[10]。二次MVD手術(shù)的患者可能有更高的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率8.3%~32.0%,聽(tīng)力障礙發(fā)生率為6.7%[2,10]。
雖然MVD是治療TN最具侵入性的手術(shù)方式,但對(duì)于經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的術(shù)者來(lái)說(shuō)并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率相對(duì)較低,死亡率約為0.15%~0.80%[2,4,11]。MVD術(shù)后三叉神經(jīng)損傷率為 1.6%~22.0%,其中約50%為暫時(shí)性的[7]。面神經(jīng)損傷發(fā)生率為0.6%~10.6%,部分癥狀隨著時(shí)間推移會(huì)得到改善[12]。聽(tīng)力障礙發(fā)生率為1.2%~6.8%,在手術(shù)過(guò)程中監(jiān)測(cè)腦干誘發(fā)電位可能有助于減少這種并發(fā)癥的產(chǎn)生。無(wú)菌性腦膜炎發(fā)生率為2%,腦積水發(fā)生率為0.15%,腦脊液漏發(fā)生率為1.5%~4.0%,小腦梗死或出血發(fā)生率為0.075%~0.680%[2,6,13]。
PRR原理是三叉神經(jīng)中傳導(dǎo)痛覺(jué)的無(wú)髓細(xì)纖維(Aδ和C類(lèi)纖維)加熱到70~75℃時(shí)發(fā)生變性,而傳導(dǎo)觸覺(jué)的有髓粗纖維(Aβ類(lèi)纖維)則能耐受更高溫度,因此,對(duì)其控制加溫,可以選擇性破壞痛覺(jué)纖維,從而緩解疼痛,并保留觸覺(jué)功能。Kanpolat等[14]對(duì)行PRR的1 600例患者進(jìn)行長(zhǎng)期隨訪(fǎng),研究數(shù)據(jù)表明,初步有效率為97.6%~99.0%,半年有效率為83.3%~89.9%,5年內(nèi)有57.7%只行單次手術(shù)患者的疼痛完全緩解。Jin等[15]對(duì)90例行PRR的患者進(jìn)行長(zhǎng)期隨訪(fǎng),發(fā)現(xiàn)陣發(fā)性乃至混合性TN的治療效果較持續(xù)性(即非典型)好,術(shù)后的并發(fā)癥情況也是如此。
相較于其他幾種手術(shù)方案,PRR并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率最低:面部感覺(jué)麻木發(fā)生率為3.3%,角膜反射減弱發(fā)生率為5.7%~17.3%,角膜炎發(fā)生率為0.6%~1.9%,咀嚼肌無(wú)力發(fā)生率為32.4%,感覺(jué)減退發(fā)生率為0.6%~0.8%[14,15]。喬梁等[16]在神經(jīng)導(dǎo)航精準(zhǔn)穿刺的基礎(chǔ)上在射頻毀損之前應(yīng)用神經(jīng)電生理監(jiān)測(cè)刺激誘發(fā)患者感覺(jué)異常,進(jìn)而確認(rèn)感覺(jué)異常范圍與疼痛范圍界限,精準(zhǔn)確認(rèn)毀損位置,提高了PRR成功率,進(jìn)一步控制術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的產(chǎn)生。
PBC使用介入方法來(lái)選擇性地?fù)p傷中、大型有髓鞘痛覺(jué)神經(jīng)纖維,保留小的有髓鞘和無(wú)髓鞘神經(jīng)纖維,切斷了TN傳導(dǎo)通路,進(jìn)而緩解疼痛。初始有效率為82.0%~93.8%,1年內(nèi)復(fù)發(fā)率為25.4%,4年內(nèi)疼痛控制率為69.4%,10年內(nèi)復(fù)發(fā)率為31.9%[17-19]。球囊壓迫時(shí)間對(duì)疼痛控制及并發(fā)癥產(chǎn)生有很大影響。Fraioli等[20]指出壓迫時(shí)間>10 min可導(dǎo)致患者面部感覺(jué)發(fā)生嚴(yán)重障礙,壓迫時(shí)間1~3 min在療效上并無(wú)顯著差異,但壓迫超過(guò)3 min就有可能會(huì)增加患者術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率。既往已行PBC的患者復(fù)發(fā)后再次行球囊壓迫術(shù)有一定效果,83.0%~93.8%的復(fù)發(fā)患者即刻疼痛緩解,5年內(nèi)54.5%的患者疼痛完全緩解[21]。
PBC很容易造成患者面部感覺(jué)減退,其中89%~100%有麻木感[7,19]。角膜反射減弱率為0.0%~3.1%,聽(tīng)力障礙發(fā)生率為2.4%~6.3%,咀嚼肌無(wú)力發(fā)生率為1.2%~12.0%,臉頰血腫發(fā)生率為3.5%~6.7%,無(wú)菌性腦膜炎發(fā)生率為0.7%,細(xì)菌性腦膜炎發(fā)生率為0.7%~1.0%,假性動(dòng)脈瘤可能發(fā)生在1%[17-19,22]。三叉神經(jīng)功能障礙出現(xiàn)的可能性與球囊壓迫的持續(xù)時(shí)間成正比。重復(fù)行PBC的患者三叉神經(jīng)功能障礙發(fā)生率較高,其中55%會(huì)發(fā)生持續(xù)性面部麻木,7%出現(xiàn)同側(cè)面部無(wú)力和0%~3.4%感覺(jué)減退[19,21]。
SRS是將(X或γ)射線(xiàn)聚焦于三叉神經(jīng)入腦橋段,在靶區(qū)形成小范圍的高劑量區(qū),造成痛覺(jué)傳入阻滯而取得良好的治療效果,且治療后三叉神經(jīng)的運(yùn)動(dòng)功能不受影響,其中伽馬刀技術(shù)近年來(lái)在臨床中得到了廣泛的應(yīng)用。經(jīng)過(guò)伽馬刀治療后,79.0%~91.8%的患者立刻疼痛癥狀緩解;1年內(nèi),75%~90%的患者可以很好的控制疼痛;3年內(nèi),70%的患者疼痛可以控制,其中34%的患者無(wú)需藥物控制;5年內(nèi),44%~65%的患者疼痛緩解;10年內(nèi),30%~51.5%的患者疼痛控制良好[23-24]。在大部分接受伽馬刀治療的TN患者中,29%最終需要進(jìn)一步的治療[25]。Smith等[26]報(bào)道179例患者經(jīng)X刀治療的結(jié)果,疼痛顯著緩解率為79.3%,19%的患者在13.5個(gè)月內(nèi)出現(xiàn)疼痛復(fù)發(fā)。
Tuleasca等[27]對(duì)伽馬刀術(shù)后復(fù)發(fā)患者行二次手術(shù),初始疼痛控制率為60%~100%,1年后75%的患者可以有效控制疼痛。接受多次伽馬刀手術(shù)的患者中,平均隨訪(fǎng)22.9個(gè)月,35.3%的患者依舊能夠很好地控制疼痛[28-29]。在接受過(guò)其他手術(shù)治療失敗后再行伽馬刀的患者,1年內(nèi)有效率為81%,3年內(nèi)為66%,6年為58%[30,31]。對(duì)于伴有感覺(jué)減退的患者大部分可以較好地控制疼痛,所需要的干預(yù)也較少。行MVD后復(fù)發(fā)的患者,伽馬刀治療后77.8%在14 d內(nèi)疼痛完全緩解,明顯快于已行其他手術(shù)的患者,10年后,44.3%的患者仍不需要用藥物來(lái)控制疼痛[32]。
伽馬刀術(shù)后感覺(jué)減退發(fā)生率為6%~42%。感覺(jué)減退可能會(huì)延遲出現(xiàn),平均發(fā)生在術(shù)后的12個(gè)月內(nèi)[25]。感覺(jué)減退出現(xiàn)與放射劑量有關(guān),隨著劑量增加疼痛明顯緩解,疼痛復(fù)發(fā)率降低,但是麻木發(fā)生率升高,再次行伽馬刀后,感覺(jué)減退發(fā)生率在11%~80%,角膜反射減弱率為6.6%[23,27]。初次行MVD、PRR或伽馬刀,復(fù)發(fā)后再行伽馬刀時(shí),患者面部麻木發(fā)生率為9.3%~26.0%[30]。
治療TN的方案不同,其成功率和并發(fā)癥的情況亦不同,因此需綜合考慮不同的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和優(yōu)勢(shì),針對(duì)特定患者確定個(gè)體化的治療方案。MVD具有較高的初始有效率以及最長(zhǎng)的疼痛控制時(shí)間,PRR和MVD的初始有效率相似,但MVD手術(shù)后作用時(shí)間更長(zhǎng),復(fù)發(fā)率也較低[33]。且行PRR的患者比接受MVD或伽馬刀的患者更有可能需要后續(xù)如口服卡馬西平等藥物控制。盡管PRR的感覺(jué)障礙發(fā)生率高于伽馬刀或MVD,但是其并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率最低[34]。
MVD術(shù)后早期無(wú)效意味著血管減壓不徹底,后期延遲緩解的可能性小,建議早期行二次手術(shù)處理,術(shù)中容易發(fā)現(xiàn)既往遺漏的隱匿性血管壓迫,粘連問(wèn)題少,更容易保護(hù)神經(jīng)、小腦和腦干。后期處理需要面對(duì)手術(shù)粘連嚴(yán)重、探查困難,也更容易損傷巖靜脈、顱神經(jīng)和腦干。因此,早期手術(shù)不增加手術(shù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn),同時(shí)也可以提高治愈率。
考慮到費(fèi)用問(wèn)題,PRR的花費(fèi)最少,其次是MVD,再次是伽馬刀,然而,這一研究并沒(méi)有涉及到患者術(shù)后疼痛復(fù)發(fā)的問(wèn)題[34]。根據(jù)患者意愿選擇伽馬刀或MVD后,行MVD的術(shù)后有效率明顯高于伽馬刀,并且MVD能立即快速的緩解疼痛[35]。對(duì)>65歲的患者同樣發(fā)現(xiàn)類(lèi)似的結(jié)果[36]。雖然MVD在嚴(yán)重并發(fā)癥(包括面部無(wú)力、聽(tīng)力損失、小腦梗塞或血腫、腦脊液滲漏)以及高死亡率方面比其他手術(shù)更高,但對(duì)于經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的術(shù)者,這些并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率相對(duì)較低。鑒于MVD極高的遠(yuǎn)期緩解率,其仍然是典型TN患者首選的治療方案,包括可耐受手術(shù)的老年患者。
綜上所述,TN是一種常見(jiàn)并嚴(yán)重影響患者生存質(zhì)量的功能性疾病,臨床上需要根據(jù)患者的具體情況選擇合適的治療方案,增加患者因素和個(gè)體化診斷和治療的理念。尤其對(duì)于外科手術(shù)后復(fù)發(fā)的患者更需要制定具體的診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與進(jìn)一步的治療方法。
[1] Pamir M,Peker S.Microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia:a long-term follow-up study[J].Minim Invasive Neurosurg,2006,49(6):342-346.
[2] Barker FG 2nd,Jannetta PJ,Bissonette DJ,et al.The long-term outcome of microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia[J].N Engl J Med,1996,334(17):1077-1083.
[3] Sindou M,Leston J,Decullier E,etal.Microvascular decompression for primary trigeminal neuralgia:long-term effectiveness and prognostic factors in a series of 362 consecutive patients with clear-cut neurovascular conflicts who underwent pure decompression[J].J Neurosurg,2007,107(6):1144-1153.
[4] Degn J,Brennum J.Surgical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.Results from the use ofglycerolinjection,microvascular decompression,and rhizotomia[J].Acta Neurochir(Wien),2010,152(12):2125-2132.
[5] Tyler-Kabara EC,Kassam AB,Horowitz MH,et al.Predictors of outcome in surgically managed patients with typical and atypical trigeminal neuralgia:comparison of results following microvascular decompression[J].J Neurosurg,2002,96(3):527-531.
[6] Broggi G, Ferroli P, Franzini A, et al. Microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia:comments on a series of 250 cases,including 10 patients with multiple sclerosis[J].J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry,2000,68(1):59-64.
[7] Ashkan K,Marsh H.Microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia in the elderly:a review of the safety and efficacy[J].Neurosurgery,2004,55(4):840-850.
[8] Montano N,Conforti G,Di Bonaventura R,et al.Advances in diagnosis and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia[J].Ther Clin Risk Manag,2015,11:289-299.
[9] BakkerNA,Van Dijk JM,Immenga S,etal.Repeat microvascular decompression for recurrent idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia[J].J Neurosurg,2014,121(4):936-939.
[10] Bederson JB, Wilson CB. Evaluation of microvascular decompression and partial sensory rhizotomy in 252 cases of trigeminal neuralgia[J].J Neurosurg,1989,71(3):359-367.
[11] Kalkanis SN,Eskandar EN,Carter BS,et al.Microvascular decompression surgery in the united states,1996 to 2000:mortality rates,morbidity rates,and the effects of hospital and surgeon volumes[J].Neurosurgery,2003,52(6):1251-1262.
[12] Chang JW,Chang JH,Park YG,et al.Microvascular decompression in trigeminal neuralgia:a correlation of threedimensional time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography and surgical findings[J].Stereotact Funct Neurosurg,2000,74(3-4):167-174.
[13] McLaughlin MR,Jannetta PJ,Clyde BL,et al.Microvascular decompression of cranial nerves:lessons learned after 4400 operations[J].J Neurosurg,1999,90(1):1-8.
[14] Kanpolat Y,Savas A,Bekar A,et al.Percutaneous controlled radiofrequency trigeminal rhizotomy for the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia:25-year experience with 1,600 patients[J].Neurosurgery,2001,48(3):524-532,discussion 532-534.
[15] Jin HS,Shin JY,Kim YC,et al.Predictive factors associated with success and failure for radiofrequency thermocoagulation in patients with trigeminal neuralgia[J].Pain Physician,2015,18(6):537-545.
[16] 喬梁,朱宏偉,陶蔚,等.神經(jīng)導(dǎo)航下三叉神經(jīng)半月節(jié)射頻熱凝術(shù)中的電生理研究[J].臨床神經(jīng)外科雜志,2014,2:107-109.
[17] Fraioli B,Esposito V,Guidetti B,et al.Treatment of trigeminal neuralgia by thermocoagulation,glycerolization,and percutaneous compression of the gasserian ganglion and/or retrogasserian rootlets:long-term results and therapeutic protocol[J].Neurosurgery,1989,24(2):239-245.
[18] Abdennebi B,Bouatta F,Chitti M,et al.Percutaneous balloon compression of the Gasserian ganglion in trigeminal neuralgia.Long-term results in 150 cases[J].Acta Neurochir(Wien),1995,136(1-2):72-74.
[19] Skirving DJ,Dan NG.A 20-year review of percutaneous balloon compression of the trigeminal ganglion[J].J Neurosurg,2001,94(6):913-917.
[20] Fraioli B,Esposito V,Guidetti B,et al.Treatment of trigeminal neuralgia by thermocoagulation,glycerolization,and percutaneous compression of the gasserian ganglion and/or retrogasserian rootlets:long-term results and therapeutic protocol[J].Neurosurgery,1989,24(2):239-245.
[21] Omeis I,Smith D,Kim S,etal.Percutaneous balloon compression for the treatment of recurrent trigeminal neuralgia:long-term outcome in 29 patients[J].Stereotact Funct Neurosurg,2008,86(4):259-265.
[22] de Siqueira SR,da Nóbrega JC,de Siqueira JT,et al.Frequency of postoperative complications after balloon compression for idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia:prospective study[J].Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod,2006,102(5):e39-45.
[23] Taich ZJ,Goetsch SJ,Monaco E,et al.Stereotactic radiosurgery treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: clinical outcomes and prognostic factors[J].World Neurosurg,2016,90:604-612.e11.
[24] Wolf A,Kondziolka D.Gamma knife surgery in trigeminal neuralgia[J].Neurosurg Clin N Am,2016;27(3):297-304.
[25] Kondziolka D,Zorro O,Lobato-Polo J,et al.Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery for idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia[J].J Neurosurg,2010,112(4):758-765.
[26] Smith ZA,Gorgulho AA,Bezrukiy N,et al.Dedicated linear accelerator radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia:a single-center experience in 179 patients with varied dose prescriptions and treatment plans[J].Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2011,81(1):225-231.
[27] Tuleasca C,Carron R,Resseguier N,et al.Repeat Gamma Knife surgery for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia:long-term outcomes and systematic review[J].J Neurosurg,2014,121(Suppl):210-221.
[28] Tempel ZJ,Chivukula S,Monaco EA 3rd,et al.The results of a third Gamma Knife procedure for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia[J].J Neurosurg,2015,122(1):169-179.
[29] Kano H,Kondziolka D,Yang HC,et al.Outcome predictors after gamma knife radiosurgery for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia[J].Neurosurgery,2010,67(6):1637-1645.
[30] Huang CF,Chiou SY,Wu MF,et al.Gamma Knife surgery for recurrent or residual trigeminal neuralgia after a failed initial procedure[J].J Neurosurg,2010,113(Suppl):172-177.
[31] Tuleasca C,Carron R,Resseguier N,et al.Decreased probability of initial pain cessation in classic trigeminal neuralgia treated with gamma knife surgery in case of previous microvascular decompression:a prospective series of 45 patients with>1 year of follow-up[J].Neurosurgery,2015,77(1):87-95,discussion 94-95.
[32] Amirnovin R,Neimat JS,Roberts JA,et al.Multimodality treatment of trigeminal neuralgia[J].Stereotact Funct Neurosurg,2005,83(5-6):197-201.
[33] Holland M,Noeller J,Buatti J,et al.The cost-effectiveness of surgery for trigeminal neuralgia in surgically naive patients:a retrospective study[J].Clin Neurol Neurosurg,2015,137:34-37.
[34] Dai ZF,Huang Q,Liu H,et al.Efficacy of stereotactic gamma knife surgery and microvascular decompression in the treatment of primary trigeminal neuralgia:a retrospective study of 220 cases from a single center[J].J Peace Res,2016,9:535-542.
[35] Oh IH,Choi SK,Park BJ,et al.The treatment outcome of elderly patientswith idiopathictrigeminalneuralgia:micro-vascular decompression versus gamma knife radiosurgery[J].J Korean Neurosurg Soc,2008,44(4):199-204.
[36] Lopez BC,Hamlyn PJ,Zakrzewska JM.Systematic review of ablative neurosurgical techniques for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia[J].Neurosurgery,2004,54(4):973-983.