Trigeminal neuralgia and genetics: A systematic review

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a severe facial pain disease of unknown cause and unclear genetic background. To examine the existing knowledge about genetics in TN, we performed a systematic study asking about the prevalence of familial trigeminal neuralgia, and which genes that have been identified in human TN studies and in animal models of trigeminal pain. MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from inception to January 2021. 71 studies were included in the systematic review. Currently, few studies provide information about the prevalence of familial TN; the available evidence indicates that about 1–2% of TN cases have the familial form. The available human studies propose the following genes to be possible contributors to development of TN: CACNA1A, CACNA1H, CACNA1F, KCNK1, TRAK1, SCN9A, SCN8A, SCN3A, SCN10A, SCN5A, NTRK1, GABRG1, MPZ gene, MAOA gene and SLC6A4. Their role in familial TN still needs to be addressed. The experimental animal studies suggest an emerging role of genetics in trigeminal pain, though the animal models may be more relevant for trigeminal neuropathic pain than TN per se. In summary, this systematic review suggests a more important role of genetic factors in TN pathogenesis than previously assumed.


Protocol and registration
5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide registration information including registration number.

5
Eligibility criteria 6 Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.

5
Information sources 7 Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched.

5
Search 8 Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated.

Suppl. material
Study selection 9 State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, included in the meta-analysis).

5
Data collection process 10 Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.

6
Data items 11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made.

6-7
Risk of bias in individual studies 12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.

Study selection
17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. 8 and Fig. 1 Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and provide the citations.

13-19
Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias).

19-20
Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research.

FUNDING
Funding 27 Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review.