Evidence Hub

Spinal Cord Ischemia Secondary to Aortic Dissection: Case Report with Literature Review for Different Clinical Presentations, Risk Factors, Radiological Findings, Therapeutic Modalities, and Outcome

Hosna Elshony, Abdelrahman Idris, Alaa Ahmed, Murouj A Almaghrabi, Walaa Ahmed, Shouq Fallatah

Case Reports in Neurology, 2021

12 citations

Abstract

Aortic dissection (AD) is a serious condition that causes transient or permanent neurological problems that include spinal cord ischemia (SCI), which occurs when AD extends into the descending aorta resulting in insufficient perfusion of segmental arteries that supplies the spinal cord. We report a 64-year-old male, presented with severe back pain, asymmetrical paresthesia, and weakness of both limbs, more in the left lower limb with loss of pinprick, temperature, and fine touch sensation on the lower left lower limb below the level of T5 with preserved proprioception and vibration and urine hesitancy. Computed tomography showed AD, Stanford type A, and spinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed hyperintense owl’s eye sign at T5. The patient was diagnosed as anterior spinal artery syndrome secondary to an AD and referred for aortic surgical repair with good functional outcome. In our review to cases of SCI due to AD, it was more common in males above 55 years, pain only found in 47.8% of patients, with anterior cord syndrome on top of the clinical presentations, and hypertension is the most common risk factor. MRI spine showed thoracic location predominance. Surgical or endovascular repair especially for type A and complicated type B should be considered to avoid complications, and cerebrospinal fluid drainage is a very useful tool in reversing SCI specially if done early with favorable outcome. Only the old age is associated with increased risk of mortality. Early…

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