4.3 Review

Management of intracranial arachnoid cysts: Institutional experience with initial 32 cases and review of the literature

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
卷 110, 期 1, 页码 1-7

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2007.08.009

关键词

intracranial arachnoid cyst; surgery; marsupialization; cystoperitoneal shunt; endoscopic fenestration; stereotactic aspiration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Surgical indications and modalities in treatment of intracranial arachnoid cysts still remain controversial owing to limited understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms and natural history of this pathology. Current literature favours endoscopic interventions for arachnoid cysts. We retrospectively reviewed 32 intracranial arachnoid cysts managed over 1 1-year period in our institution. Post-therapeutic results were clinically and radiologically assessed. Supratentorial location of cysts was noted in 75% cases (n=24) while 25% cysts were located infratentorially (n=8). The mean cyst size was 54 mm in largest dimension (range 10-100 mm; median 50 mm). Hemiparesis was noted in 37% cases, raised intracranial pressure and seizures in 34% cases each, while cranial nerve dysfunction was noted in 16% cases. Seventy five percent cases were surgically managed: excision and marsupialization was done in 53% cases (n = 17), stereotactic aspiration in 12.5% cases (n=4), endoscopic fenestration in 6.25% cases (n=2) and cystoperitoneal shunting initially in 1 case (3%) and after recurrence of primarily excised cysts in 2 cases. Conservative treatment with regular clinical and imaging control was done in 25% cases (n=8). The mean follow-up was 72 months (range: 12-108 months). Good outcome was noted in 72% cases, 16% cases remained unchanged while only one case with giant suprasellar cyst worsened. With excision and marsupialization, 65% of cysts reduced in size (n=11/17), 17% cysts resolved completely (n=3/17). The overall recurrence rate was 29%. Surgery excision and marsupialization of symptomatic cases provided good results. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据