4.5 Review

Systematic Review of Surgical Management of Spinal Intradural Arachnoid Cysts

期刊

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
卷 158, 期 -, 页码 E298-E309

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.10.173

关键词

Cyst; Intradural arachnoid; Spinal; Surgery; Systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spinal intradural arachnoid cysts (SIACs) are rare pathological lesions that can cause neurological deficits. Surgical management using various approaches has been effective, although the etiology of SIACs is not fully understood.
OBJECTIVE: Spinal intradural arachnoid cysts (SIACs) are rare pathological lesions that can arise via out-pouchings of the arachnoid layer in the spinal canal that can result in neurological deficits. We performed a systematic literature review regarding the current surgical techniques used in the management of SIACs and discussed the prevailing hypotheses surrounding the etiology of SIACs. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed in December 2020 using EMBASE and MEDLINE for reports regarding the surgical management of SIACs. Data were collected regarding the demographics of the patients, classification system used, presence or absence of syrinxes, preoperative imaging modality, surgical approach and extent of resection, and postoperative outcomes and follow-up. RESULTS: Our search yielded 19 reports for inclusion in the present study. The 19 studies included a total of 414 cases, with an overall male/female ratio of 0.93:1. The most common site for the SIACs was the thoracic spinal cord at 77.5%. The symptoms were very similar across the 19 studies. Of the 19 studies, 15 had used resection to manage the SIACs, 10 had used fenestration or marsupialization, and 4 had used cystoarachnoid or cystoperitoneal shunts. CONCLUSIONS: SIACs are rare and debilitating spinal pathological lesions, with the etiology of primary SIACs still not fully elucidated. Multiple surgical approaches have been effective, with the optimal operative strategy largely dependent on the individual patient and cyst factors on a case-by-case basis.

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

4.5
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