A systematic review on diagnostic test accuracy of magnetic resonance neurography versus clinical neurosensory assessment for post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy in patients reporting neurosensory disturbance.

Abstract

Objectives:To perform a systematic review of published studies on diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance neurography (MRN) vs clinical neurosensory testing (NST) for post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN) in patients reporting neurosensory disturbances (NSD).Methods:Human studies except case reports, reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were consulted. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Predetermined data extraction parameters were noted and summarized.Results:8 studies met eligibility criteria of which 7 were retrospective, representing 444 subjects. Most studies were at high risk of bias with low applicability concerns. Populations and objectives were divergent with a large variation in timing (3 days–17 years post injury) and parameters (multiple coil designs, fat suppression techniques, additional contrast agent) of MRI acquisition. T2 weighted 3 T imaging with short echo times (2.2–100 ms) and fat suppression was applied in seven studies, techniques varied. Determination of sensitivity and specificity could not be performed due to the methodological variation between studies and lacking comparative data between index and reference tests. Based on limited data, PTTN correlated reasonably well between clinical assessment, intraoperative findings and MRN abnormalities (k = 0.57). Increased signal intensity correlated with persistency of neurosensory disturbances in one study. Intra- (ICC 0.914–0.927) and interobserver (k = 0.70–0.891) MRN variability was considered good to excellent. One retrospective study showed substantial impact of MRN on clinical decision making in one-third of patients.Conclusion:Currently, there is insufficient scientific knowledge to support or refute the use of MRN. Based on limited data, MRN seems promising and reliable in detection and grading of PTTN. Methodological issues underline the importance for prospective blinded studies with standardization of signal intensity calculation and rigorous reporting of MRI acquisition parameters.