Masseteric-Facial Anastomosis: A Report of Three Cases

Intoduction The pathways of the facial nerve are variable, and knowledge of that is essential. The worst impact caused by facial paralysis is related to quality of life, especially regarding the self-esteem and social acceptance on the part of the patients, leading to social isolation and disruption on their mental health. Case Report A 33-year-old female patient, with a stage-T3 acoustic neurinoma, presented with a moderate dysfunction (grades II to III) according to the House- Brackmann (HB) Facial Nerve Grading System. A 43-year-old male patient, with a stage- T4B trigeminal schwannoma, underwent a resective surgery and presented grade-VI dysfunction according to the HB scale. And a female patient with a stage-T4A acoustic neurinoma presented grade-IV dysfunction according to the HB scale. Discussion We performed a literature review of papers related to surgeries for masseteric-facial nerve anastomosis and compiled the results in table; then, we compared these data with those obtained from our cases. Conclusion The masseteric nerve is the one that shows the best prognosis among all the cranial nerves that could be used, but it is also necessary to perform well the surgical technique to access the facial branch and consequently achieve a better masseteric-facial nerve anastomosis.

Neuromodulation for Medically Refractory Neuropathic Pain: Spinal Cord Stimulation, Deep Brain Stimulation, Motor Cortex Stimulation, and Posterior Insula Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of neuropathic pain (NP) continues to be controversial as well as an economic health issue and a challenge to health care. Neurosurgery can offer different methods of neuromodulation that may improve patients' condition, including deep brain stimulation (DBS), motor cortex stimulation (MCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS), and posterior insula stimulation (PIS). There is no consensus of opinion as to the final effects of these procedures, which stimulation parameters to select, the correct timing, or how to select the patients who will best benefit from these procedures. OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence available regarding these 4 procedures and the management of NP. METHODS: We conducted a PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library database search from 1990 to 2020. The strategy of the search concentrated on the following keywords: "neuropathic pain," "chronic pain," "deep brain stimulation," "motor cortex stimulation," "spinal cord stimulation," "insula stimulation," and "neuromodulation." Studies that provided data regarding the immediate and long-term effectiveness of the procedure, anatomic stimulation target, percentage of pain control, and cause of the NP were included. RESULTS: The most frequent causes of NP were phantom limb pain and central poststroke pain in the MCS group; central poststroke pain, phantom limb pain, and spinal cord injury (SCI) in the DBS group; and complex regional pain syndrome and failed back surgery syndrome in the SCS group. Pain improvement varied between 35% and 80% in the MCS group and 50% and 60% in the DBS group. In the SCS group, successful rates varied between 38% and 89%. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the literature supporting SCS, DBS, MCS, and PIS methods for the treatment of NP. We found consistent evidence supporting MCS, DBS, and SCS as possible treatments for NP; however, we were not able to define which procedure should be indicated for each cause. Furthermore, we did not find enough evidence to justify the routine use of PIS. We conclude that unanswered points need to be discussed in this controversial field and emphasize that new research must be developed to treat patients with NP, to improve their quality of life.