Evidence Hub

Chiari Type 1 Malformation-induced Intracranial Hypertension with Diffuse Brain Edema Treated with Foramen Magnum Decompression: A Case Report

Toshiki Fukuoka, Yusuke Nishimura, M. Hara, Shoichi Haimoto, K. Eguchi, S. Yoshikawa, T. Wakabayashi, H. Ginsberg

NMC Case Report Journal, 2017

12 citations

Abstract

Chiari type 1 malformation (CM1) rarely causes papilloedema, which is indicative of high intracranial pressure with or without ventricular dilatation. Furthermore, concomitant brain parenchymal abnormalities have not been reported to date. In this paper, the authors report on a young woman of CM1-induced intracranial hypertension (ICH) with diffuse brain edema with a focus on venous sinus assessment, and discuss the surgical strategy. A 24-year-old woman presented to Nagoya University Hospital complaining of 4-year history of severe occipital headache and blurry vision with slowly progressive worsening. Head and whole spine MRI showed a CM1 with diffuse white matter hyperintensities (WMH) on T2-weighted imaging and narrowed brain sulci without hydrocephalus. Lumbar puncture revealed extremely high opening pressure. Detailed blood examination and other radiographical imaging studies denied the presence of tumor, collagen disease, encephalitis and other entities. Head magnetic resonance venography and angiography demonstrated severe transverse sinus stenosis on both sides. Foramen magnum decompression was performed to alleviate the ICH by restoration of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) stagnation at the foramen magnum with successful outcome. The patient completely recovered from preoperative symptoms immediately after surgery. The diffuse WMH and narrowing brain sulci have been resolving. The most feasible explanation for this complicated pathophysiology was ICH induced by CM1 led…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free