[Application of two kinds of electrophysiological monitoring techniques for the prediction of facial nerve outcomes after vestibular Schwannoma surgery]
L Li,M M Wang,G S Han,Z J Yue,L Zhang,W W Shen,X Y Yu,L X Wang,J M Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220621-01358
2023-03-07
Abstract:Objective: To investigate the application of transcranial facial nerve motor evoked potential (FNMEP) and direct nerve electrical stimulation (DNES) for the prediction of facial nerve function after vestibular schwannoma surgery. Methods: The clinical data of 106 patients who underwent vestibular schwannoma surgery under electrophysiological monitoring of facial nerve between 2017 and 2021 were retrospectively examined, and there were 57 males and 49 females, with a mean age of (51±11) years. Neuroelectrophysiological monitoring was performed in all patients during the operation. After the tumor was removed, FNMEP and DNES were used for electrophysiological evaluation of facial nerve function. The amplitude ratios of FNMEP to baseline (M1) and the brainstem segment to the internal auditory canal segment of DNES (M2) were recorded after the tumor was removed, respectively. The correlation between these two ratios and facial nerve function at 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after the operation were compared. According to the House-Brackmann (HB) scale, Grade Ⅰ-Ⅱ refers to good facial nerve function, and grade Ⅲ-Ⅵ refers to moderate and severe facial nerve dysfunction. Non-parameter Spearman correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between M1 and M2 and facial nerve function at 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after operation, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to verify the diagnostic efficacy of M1 and M2 for predicting the prognosis of postoperative facial nerve function. Results: Among 106 patients, 102 cases (96.3%) underwent total tumor resection, 4 patients (3.7%) underwent subtotal resection, 104 patients (98.1%) had anatomical preservation of facial nerves, and there were no deaths reported. All patients could evoke reliable FNMEP and 2 patients could not evoke DNES in the brainstem segment of the facial nerve. There were 81 (76.4%), 99 (93.4%) and 103 patients (97.2%) with satisfactory function of facial nerve at 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after surgery, respectively. M1 had large absolute values of Spearman correlation coefficient at 1 day (ρ=|-0.648|) and 1 month (ρ=|-0.552|) after surgery (both P<0.001), while M2 showed a greater absolute value of Spearman correlation coefficient at 3 months (ρ=|-0.395|) than that of M1 (ρ=|-0.378|) (P<0.001). Cut-off value of M1 was 0.58 (sensitivity=0.92, specificity=0.64), and that of M2 was 0.36 (sensitivity=0.64, specificity=1.00). Meanwhile, M1<0.58 or M2<0.36 suggested moderate and severe impairment of facial nerve function. Conclusions: Both FNMEP and DNES during vestibular schwannoma surgery can effectively evaluate the postoperative facial nerve function. FNMEP is better than DNES in predicting the early postoperative facial nerve function, but DNES is better for predicting the long-term postoperative facial nerve function.