Project description:ImportanceThere is no consensus on the benefits of routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the facial nerve in patients with suspected idiopathic peripheral facial palsy (PFP) (ie, Bell palsy [BP]).ObjectivesTo estimate the proportion of adult patients in whom MRI led to correction of an initial clinical diagnosis of BP; to determine the proportion of patients with confirmed BP who had MRI evidence of facial nerve neuritis without secondary lesions; and to identify factors associated with secondary (nonidiopathic) PFP at initial presentation and 1 month later.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective multicenter cohort study analyzed the clinical and radiological data of 120 patients initially diagnosed with suspected BP from January 1, 2018, to April 30, 2022, at the emergency department of 3 tertiary referral centers in France.InterventionsAll patients screened for clinically suspected BP underwent an MRI of the entire facial nerve with a double-blind reading of all images.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of patients in whom MRI led to a correction of the initial diagnosis of BP (any condition other than BP, including potentially life-threating conditions) and results of contrast enhancement of the facial nerve were described.ResultsAmong the 120 patients initially diagnosed with suspected BP, 64 (53.3%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 51 (18) years. Magnetic resonance imaging of the facial nerve led to a correction of the diagnosis in 8 patients (6.7%); among them, potentially life-threatening conditions that required changes in treatment were identified in 3 (37.5%). The MRI confirmed the diagnosis of BP in 112 patients (93.3%), among whom 106 (94.6%) showed evidence of facial nerve neuritis on the affected side (hypersignal on gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images). This was the only objective sign confirming the idiopathic nature of PFP.Conclusions and relevanceThese preliminary results suggest the added value of the routine use of facial nerve MRI in suspected cases of BP. Multicentered international prospective studies should be organized to confirm these results.

Project description:ImportanceBell palsy (BP) has been reported as an adverse event following the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, but neither a causative relationship nor a higher prevalence than in the general population has been established.ObjectiveTo compare the incidence of BP in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients vs unvaccinated individuals or placebo recipients.Data sourcesA systematic search of MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from the inception of the COVID-19 report (December 2019) to August 15, 2022.Study selectionArticles reporting BP incidence with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were included.Data extraction and synthesisThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline and was conducted with the random- and fixed-effect models using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The quality of the studies was evaluated by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcomes of interest were to compare BP incidence among (1) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine recipients, (2) nonrecipients in the placebo or unvaccinated cohorts, (3) different types of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and (4) SARS-CoV-2-infected vs SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated individuals.ResultsFifty studies were included, of which 17 entered the quantitative synthesis. Pooling 4 phase 3 randomized clinical trials showed significantly higher BP in recipients of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (77 525 vaccine recipients vs 66 682 placebo recipients; odds ratio [OR], 3.00; 95% CI, 1.10-8.18; I2 = 0%). There was, however, no significant increase in BP after administration of the messenger RNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pooling 8 observational studies (13 518 026 doses vs 13 510 701 unvaccinated; OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.42-1.16; I2 = 94%). No significant difference was found in BP among 22 978 880 first-dose recipients of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine compared with 22 978 880 first-dose recipients of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.82-1.15; I2 = 0%). Bell palsy was significantly more common after SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 2 822 072) than after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations (n = 37 912 410) (relative risk, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.57-6.62; I2 = 95%).Conclusions and relevanceThis systematic review and meta-analysis suggests a higher incidence of BP among SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated vs placebo groups. The occurrence of BP did not differ significantly between recipients of the Pfizer/BioNTech vs Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 infection posed a significantly greater risk for BP than SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Project description:ImportanceThere is no widely accepted assessment tool or common language used by clinicians caring for patients with facial palsy, making exchange of information challenging. Standardized photography may represent such a language and is imperative for precise exchange of information and comparison of outcomes in this special patient population.ObjectivesTo review the literature to evaluate the use of facial photography in the management of patients with facial palsy and to examine the use of photography in documenting facial nerve function among members of the Sir Charles Bell Society-a group of medical professionals dedicated to care of patients with facial palsy.Design, setting, and participantsA literature search was performed to review photographic standards in patients with facial palsy. In addition, a cross-sectional survey of members of the Sir Charles Bell Society was conducted to examine use of medical photography in documenting facial nerve function. The literature search and analysis was performed in August and September 2015, and the survey was conducted in August and September 2013.Main outcomes and measuresThe literature review searched EMBASE, CINAHL, and MEDLINE databases from inception of each database through September 2015. Additional studies were identified by scanning references from relevant studies. Only English-language articles were eligible for inclusion. Articles that discussed patients with facial palsy and outlined photographic guidelines for this patient population were included in the study. The survey was disseminated to the Sir Charles Bell Society members in electronic form. It consisted of 10 questions related to facial grading scales, patient-reported outcome measures, other psychological assessment tools, and photographic and videographic recordings.ResultsIn total, 393 articles were identified in the literature search, 7 of which fit the inclusion criteria. Six of the 7 articles discussed or proposed views specific to patients with facial palsy. However, none of the articles specifically focused on photographic standards for the population with facial palsy. Eighty-three of 151 members (55%) of the Sir Charles Bell Society responded to the survey. All survey respondents used photographic documentation, but there was variability in which facial expressions were used. Eighty-two percent (68 of 83) used some form of videography. From these data, we propose a set of minimum photographic standards for patients with facial palsy, including the following 10 static views: at rest or repose, small closed-mouth smile, large smile showing teeth, elevation of eyebrows, closure of eyes gently, closure of eyes tightly, puckering of lips, showing bottom teeth, snarling or wrinkling of the nose, and nasal base view.Conclusions and relevanceThere is no consensus on photographic standardization to report outcomes for patients with facial palsy. Minimum photographic standards for facial paralysis publications are proposed. Videography of the dynamic movements of these views should also be recorded.Level of evidenceNA.

Dataset Information

Bell palsy.

Publications

Bell palsy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets