Experience with Management of Intracranial Arachnoid Cysts.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to analyze the demographics, clinical presentation, and surgical outcome of intracranial arachnoid cysts and to review the surgical options.
METHODS
This is a retrospective observational study of 56 cases of symptomatic arachnoid cysts among all age groups treated between 2004 and 2020 at the Bombay Hospital, Mumbai. Endoscopic fenestration, microsurgical cyst excision, and shunt insertion were the interventions performed. Clinical presentation, cyst reduction post-intervention, and complications were studied. The follow-up period varied from 1 month to 16 years. Statistical analysis was done for 43 patients with a minimum of 3 years' follow-up.
RESULTS
In all, 75% of patients were <18 years of age. Of these, the majority were between the age of 1 and 10 years. There were 14 cases of temporal, 13 cases of retrocerebellar, 10 cases of quadrigeminal cistern, and 7 cases each of interhemispheric and suprasellar arachnoid cysts. The most common clinical presentation was headache and vomiting. Concomitant hydrocephalus was seen on imaging in 24 cases. Endoscopic fenestration of cyst was the most routinely performed procedure (35 cases). Four patients of endoscopic fenestration underwent a redo endoscopic procedure on follow-up. Post-operative reduction in cyst size was found to be significantly better after endoscopic fenestration (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Though the best available treatment for arachnoid cysts remains controversial, surgery has been found to be beneficial in symptomatic cases. Endoscopic fenestration is considered the first-line surgical option and it may be followed by shunt, if necessary. Shunts may be preferred in very young children where there is associated hydrocephalus/macrocephaly.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.