Analysis of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of the Angle between Clivus and Supraocciput in Patients with Chiari's Malformation Type I Following Surgical DecompressionFunding None.
04 November 2018
26 January 2019
21 February 2019 (online)
Background The objective of this study was to investigate whether different angles between the clivus and supraocciput (C–SO angle) in patients with Chiari's malformation type I (CMI) after posterior fossa decompression lead to different clinical and radiographic outcomes.
Methods A total of 73 patients who underwent surgical decompression at our institution between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively divided into two groups: group A, with an angle less than 96 degrees, and group B, with an angle ≥ 96 degrees. Patient clinical outcomes were determined using the Chicago Chiari Outcome Scale (CCOS), and radiographic outcomes were determined by changes in the syrinx size before and after surgery. Direct comparisons were made between the two groups.
Results There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding demographics, preoperative symptoms or radiographic characteristics (p > 0.05), except for the cerebellar tonsillar descent (p ≤ 0.001). The mean overall CCOS score was 13.11 ± 1.99. The total CCOS score was significantly different between the two patient groups (p < 0.05). Moreover, group A demonstrated significantly better postoperative improvements than group B in clinical outcome measures based on the CCOS system (p = 0.035). For radiographic outcomes, the change in the syrinx between the two groups was also significantly different, with a value p = 0.024.
Conclusions A direct comparison between the two groups revealed that a smaller C–OS angle (< 96 degrees) was related to unsatisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes. Thus, the C–OS angle may emerge as a predictor of clinical or radiographic outcomes following surgical decompression in patients with CMI.
Authors Y.L. and X.W. designed the research; authors X.W., J.G., S.H., and Z.L. performed the research; authors Y.L. and J.G. collected the data; X.W. analyzed and prepared the manuscript; besides, all authors reviewed and commented on the manuscript.
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
Consent for Publication
The manuscript has not been published previously, in any language, in whole or in part, and is not currently under consideration elsewhere.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 1 McVige JW, Leonardo J. Neuroimaging and the clinical manifestations of Chiari malformation type I (CMI). Curr Pain Headache Rep 2015; 19 (06) 18
- 2 Albert GW, Menezes AH, Hansen DR, Greenlee JD, Weinstein SL. Chiari malformation type I in children younger than age 6 years: presentation and surgical outcome. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2010; 5 (06) 554-561
- 3 Wu YW, Chin CT, Chan KM, Barkovich AJ, Ferriero DM. Pediatric Chiari I malformations: do clinical and radiologic features correlate?. Neurology 1999; 53 (06) 1271-1276
- 4 Heiss JD, Patronas N, DeVroom HL. , et al. Elucidating the pathophysiology of syringomyelia. J Neurosurg 1999; 91 (04) 553-562
- 5 Lin W, Duan G, Xie J, Shao J, Wang Z, Jiao B. Comparison of results between posterior fossa decompression with and without duraplasty for the surgical treatment of Chiari malformation type I: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 2018; 110: 460-474.e5
- 6 Klekamp J. Surgical treatment of Chiari I malformation–analysis of intraoperative findings, complications, and outcome for 371 foramen magnum decompressions. Neurosurgery 2012; 71 (02) 365-380 , discussion 380
- 7 McGirt MJ, Attenello FJ, Atiba A. , et al. Symptom recurrence after suboccipital decompression for pediatric Chiari I malformation: analysis of 256 consecutive cases. Childs Nerv Syst 2008; 24 (11) 1333-1339
- 8 Basaran R, Efendioglu M, Senol M, Ozdogan S, Isik N. Morphometric analysis of posterior fossa and craniovertebral junction in subtypes of Chiari malformation. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2018; 169: 1-11
- 9 Aliaga L, Hekman KE, Yassari R. , et al. A novel scoring system for assessing Chiari malformation type I treatment outcomes. Neurosurgery 2012; 70 (03) 656-664 , discussion 664–665
- 10 Wu T, Zhu Z, Jiang J. , et al. Syrinx resolution after posterior fossa decompression in patients with scoliosis secondary to Chiari malformation type I. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (06) 1143-1150
- 11 Jiang E, Sha S, Yuan X. , et al. Comparison of clinical and radiographic outcomes for posterior fossa decompression with and without duraplasty for treatment of pediatric Chiari I malformation: a prospective study. World Neurosurg 2018; 110: e465-e472
- 12 Abbott D, Brockmeyer D, Neklason DW, Teerlink C, Cannon-Albright LA. Population-based description of familial clustering of Chiari malformation Type I. J Neurosurg 2018; 128 (02) 460-465
- 13 Schijman E. History, anatomic forms, and pathogenesis of Chiari I malformations. Childs Nerv Syst 2004; 20 (05) 323-328
- 14 Hwang HS, Moon JG, Kim CH, Oh SM, Song JH, Jeong JH. The comparative morphometric study of the posterior cranial fossa : what is effective approaches to the treatment of Chiari malformation type 1?. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2013; 54 (05) 405-410
- 15 Tubbs RS, Webb DB, Oakes WJ. Persistent syringomyelia following pediatric Chiari I decompression: radiological and surgical findings. J Neurosurg 2004; 100 (5, Suppl Pediatrics): 460-464
- 16 Naftel RP, Tubbs RS, Menendez JY, Wellons III JC, Pollack IF, Oakes WJ. Worsening or development of syringomyelia following Chiari I decompression: case report. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2013; 12 (04) 351-356
- 17 Dufton JA, Habeeb SY, Heran MK, Mikulis DJ, Islam O. Posterior fossa measurements in patients with and without Chiari I malformation. Can J Neurol Sci 2011; 38 (03) 452-455
- 18 Oldfield EH, Muraszko K, Shawker TH, Patronas NJ. Pathophysiology of syringomyelia associated with Chiari I malformation of the cerebellar tonsils. Implications for diagnosis and treatment. J Neurosurg 1994; 80 (01) 3-15