3.9 Article

Cerebral Anomalies and Chiari Type 1 Malformation

Journal

PEDIATRIC NEUROSURGERY
Volume 46, Issue 6, Pages 442-449

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000327220

Keywords

Cerebellar tonsillar ectopia; Chiari type 1 malformation; Cerebral dysgenesis; Hydrocephalus; Congenital central nervous system malformations; Craniovertebral junction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To analyze the association of diverse cerebral anomalies in a series of pediatric patients with cerebellar tonsillar ectopia. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 60 children diagnosed with Chiari type 1 malformation (CM1), of these, 20 patients (11 boys and 9 girls; mean age 7.2 years, range 2-16 years) had an associated cerebral anomaly. Symptoms of tonsillar ectopia evolved over a mean of 12 months (range 3 months to 4 years). Syringomyelia was present in 5 cases. All patients underwent a posterior fossa decompression. Results: Disclosed anomalies included: congenital hydrocephalus (n = 11), cervicomedullary kinking (n = 5), focal cerebral heterotopia with epilepsy (n = 4), partial agenesis of the corpus callosum (n = 4), hypoplastic brain stem (n = 2), holoprosencephaly (n = 1), and subcortical dysplasia in the context of neurofibromatosis type 1 (n = 1). Other malformations included: subcortical hamartoma associated with neurofibromatosis type 1, craniofacial dysmorphism secondary to Noonan syndrome, congenital occipital plagiocephaly, os odontoideum, craniofacial cleft, juvenile rheumathoid arthritis with platybasia, and osteogenesis imperfecta with bathrocephaly and scoliosis. Conclusion: Craniocerebral anomalies in children treated for CM1 may be found consistently. The association of hydrocephalus, which was the most common anomaly in this cohort, with cerebellar tonsillar ectopia may contribute to a poor outcome in regard to tonsillar herniation symptoms. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available