Importance: Quantitative assessment of facial function is difficult, and historic grading scales such as House-Brackmann have well-recognized limitations. The electronic, clinician-graded facial function scale (eFACE) allows rapid regional analysis of static, dynamic, and synkinetic facial function in patients with unilateral facial palsy within the course of a clinical encounter, but it relies on clinician assessment. A newly developed, machine-learning algorithm (Emotrics) provides automated, objective facial measurements but lacks clinical input (ie, recognizing laterality of facial palsy or synkinesis). Objectives: To compare the sensitivity of a clinician-based tool (eFACE) to a well-established intervention for facial palsy (eyelid weight placement) with an automated facial-measurement algorithm (Emotrics). Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective review was conducted of the most recent 53 patients with unilateral facial palsy who received an eyelid weight at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary Facial Nerve Center from 2014 to 2017. Preoperative and postoperative photographs were deidentified and randomized. The entire cohort was analyzed by 3 clinicians, as well as by the Emotrics program. Main Outcomes and Measures: eFACE scores of the palpebral fissure at rest (0, wide; 100, balanced; 200, narrow), with gentle eyelid closure (0, incomplete; 100, complete), and with forceful eyelid closure (0, incomplete; 100, complete) before and after eyelid weight placement were compared with palpebral fissure measurements by Emotrics. Results: Of the 53 participants, 33 were women, and mean (SD) age was 44.7 (18) years. The mean (SD) eFACE scores and Emotrics measurements (in millimeters) before vs after eyelid weight placement of the palpebral fissure at rest (eFACE, 84.3 [15.9] vs 109.7 [21.4]; Emotrics, 10.3 [2.2] vs 9.1 [1.8]), with gentle eyelid closure (eFACE, 65.9 [28.0] vs 92.1 [15.4]; Emotrics, 4.4 [2.7] vs 1.3 [2.0]), and with forceful eyelid closure (eFACE, 75.1 [28.6] vs 97.0 [10.7]; Emotrics, 3.0 [3.1] vs 0.5 [1.3]) all significantly improved. Subgroup analysis of patients with expected recovery (eg, Bell palsy) (n = 40) demonstrated significant development of ocular synkinesis on eFACE (83.9 [22.7] vs 98.9 [4.4]) after weight placement, which could also explain the improvement in eyelid function. The scores of patients with no expected recovery (n = 13) improved in both eFACE and Emotrics analysis following eyelid weight placement, though results did not reach significance, likely limited by the small subgroup size. Conclusions and Relevance: The eFACE tool agrees well with automated, objective facial measurements using a machine-learning based algorithm such as Emotrics. The eFACE tool is sensitive to spontaneous recovery and surgical intervention, and may be used for rapid regional facial function assessment from a clinician’s perspective following recovery and/or surgical intervention. Level of Evidence: 4 .

Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to summarize best practices in facial nerve management for patients with head and neck cancer. In addition, we provide a review of recent literature on novel innovations and techniques in facial reanimation surgery. Recent findings: Although recommended when tumor ablation surgery requires facial nerve sacrifice, facial reanimation procedures are not always performed. Concurrent dynamic facial reanimation with masseteric nerve transfers and cable graft repair can preserve native facial muscle function. Static suspension can provide facial support and immediate resting symmetry for patients. Eyelid weight and eye care should not be delayed, particularly in patients with trigeminal sensory deficits. Choice of neural source to innervate a gracilis-free muscle transfer for smile reanimation remains controversial; however, new techniques, such as dual innervation and multivector muscle transfer, may improve aesthetic and functional outcomes. Summary: Management of the facial nerve in the setting of head and neck cancer presents unique challenges. When possible, simultaneous oncologic resection and facial reanimation is ideal given the open surgical field, newly dissected and electrically stimulatable facial nerve branches, as well as minimizing postoperative healing time to prevent postsurgical treatment delays. A coordinated approach to facial nerve management with a multidisciplinary surgical team may help provide optimal, comprehensive care.

Background: A rare subset of sarcoidosis, neurosarcoidosis, is reported to occur in 5-7% of sarcoid patients and can manifest in a variety of ways. The most common are facial paralysis and optic neuritis, less commonly causing cochleovestibulopathy, blindness, anosmia, and other cranial nerve (CN) palsies. The sensory deficit may be severe and psychiatric symptoms may result from the effects of the disease or steroid treatment. Although MRI-compatible cochlear implants are now available, concerns about the feasibility of recoverable hearing with cochlear implantation in these patients as well as the practical difficulty of disease monitoring due to implant artifact must be considered. Results: We present 3 recent cases from different institutions. The first is a 39-year-old man with a history of progressively worsening hearing loss, followed by visual loss, delusions, agitation, ataxia, and musical auditory hallucinations, diffuse leptomeningeal enhancement on MRI with a normal serum angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) level but elevated cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) ACE levels, suggesting neurosarcoidosis, was treated with corticosteroids, and underwent successful cochlear implantation. The second is a 36-year-old woman with rapid-onset horizontal diplopia, left mixed severe sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and tinnitus, diffuse leptomeningeal enhancement on MRI, and progressive palsy of the left CNs IV, VI, VII, IX, X and XI, with altered mental status requiring admission following high-dose intravenous corticosteroids. The third is a 15-year-old boy who presented with sudden, bilateral, profound SNHL, recurrent headaches, and left facial weakness refractory to antivirals, ultimately diagnosed with neurosarcoidosis following an aborted cochlear implantation where diffuse inflammation was found, and histopathology revealed Schaumann bodies; he was treated with methotrexate and later underwent successful cochlear implantation. Conclusions: Neurosarcoidosis is an elusive diagnosis and can cause hearing loss and psychiatric symptoms. Cochlear implantation for patients with severe hearing loss should be considered once the diagnosis is confirmed, as it is possible to achieve a successful level of hearing. Psychiatric symptoms can manifest with the onset of neurosarcoidosis, result from CN deficits, or develop as a side effect from long-term, high-dose corticosteroids, and should be monitored carefully in patients with neurosarcoidosis.