1988
DOI: 10.1016/0887-8994(88)90067-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Macro cisterna magna: A marker for maldevelopment of the brain?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, it is the significance of IECM that remains most controversial principally as there are contradictory data regarding the postnatal clinical significance of this finding. Although there are reports indicating that IECM is typically associated with infants that are normal at birth and in early infancy [21,22,23,24], other studies suggest that there may be implications relating to neurodevelopment [25,26]. These latter studies suggest that although the developmental assessments of motor function in infants diagnosed with IECM fall within the normal range, they are appreciably poorer than infants in whom the CM had been normal.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 49%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, it is the significance of IECM that remains most controversial principally as there are contradictory data regarding the postnatal clinical significance of this finding. Although there are reports indicating that IECM is typically associated with infants that are normal at birth and in early infancy [21,22,23,24], other studies suggest that there may be implications relating to neurodevelopment [25,26]. These latter studies suggest that although the developmental assessments of motor function in infants diagnosed with IECM fall within the normal range, they are appreciably poorer than infants in whom the CM had been normal.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 49%
“…Pediatric data also lend support to the suggestion that IECM is not always an entirely benign observation [27]. In one series of patients under the age of 21 in whom neuroimaging was performed for indications that excluded symptoms attributable to posterior fossa disease, 1% were identified as having IECM with 62% of these displaying a developmental or neurological impairment [26]. Additional pertinent data relates to studies evaluating the effects of the forkhead box C1 (FOXC1) gene.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Further examination of the MRI scans revealed that 9 (14%) of the 64 patients with a CSP also had a hypoplastic corpus callosum and 12 ( 19%) had a large cisterna magna [7][8][9]. Review of clinical records of the group with a CSP also revealed that 13 (20%) of the 64 were microcephalic and that only 2 (3%) were macrocephalic.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neuroimaging revealed an enlarged cisterna magna with abnormally shaped posterior fossa in Patient 1 and diffuse abnormal signal lesions in the subcortical white matter in both cases, findings not previously reported in association to scimitar vein anomaly. Notably, enlarged cisterna magna is a marker for complex syndromic malformations [Bodesteiner et al, 1988;Barkovich, 2000]. Only once previously, gross malformations of the cerebral cortex, precisely vertically oriented frontal gyri and rolandic sulcus connected directly with the sylvian fissure, have been described-at autopsy-in a male infant with scimitar vein anomaly who died at the age of 2 months following catheterization procedures [Shadravan et al, 1974].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%