Evidence Hub

A Case of Subdural Hygroma due to a Ruptured Arachnoid Cyst in the Middle Cranial Fossa That Improved after Long-term Subdural Drainage: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Ayumu Yamaoka, Shouhei Noshiro, Hiroki Akiyama, Ryota Sato, Ayaka Sasagawa, Terumasa Kuroiwa, Masafumi Ohtaki, N. Mikuni

NMC Case Report Journal, 2024

Abstract

Arachnoid cysts have the potential to rupture, leading to the development of a subdural hygroma following minor trauma. Although surgery may be considered in cases of increased intracranial pressure (ICP) or regional neurological symptoms, the optimal approach remains unclear. We report a case of subdural hygroma due to a ruptured arachnoid cyst (SHrAC) with elevated ICP successfully treated with long-term subdural drainage for over 1 month. A 26-year-old man with persistent headache was admitted to our hospital. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed an arachnoid cyst within the left middle cranial fossa and a subdural hygroma in the left frontotemporal region. He was referred to our neurosurgery department for surgical intervention due to elevated ICP. Although burr hole surgery was initially performed, subsequent recurrence of elevated ICP necessitated the insertion of a subdural peritoneal shunt. However, the shunt was then removed following the development of postoperative meningitis, and a subdural drain was placed to control ICP. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage gradually decreased, and the elevated ICP improved. The subdural drain was removed approximately one and a half months after drain placement. The subdural hygroma progressively reduced and completely disappeared 4 months after drain removal. The gradual reduction in the pressure difference between the arachnoid cyst and the subdural hygroma due to long-term CSF drainage and inflammation caused by meningitis may…

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