A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The effect of filum terminale sectioning for Chiari 1 malformation treatment: systematic review. | LitMetric

Purpose: Symptomatic Chiari type I malformation (CM) is treated with posterior fossa decompression with/ without duroplasty. Few authors suggested cerebellar tonsil caudal migration due to a supposed "caudal traction" of cranial nerve structures in a so-called occult tethered cord syndrome. For these authors, filum terminale (FT) sectioning may improve CM symptoms. The objective of this review is to evaluate the effect of FT sectioning on the treatment of CM.

Methods: Using the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, we reviewed studies to evaluate patient's outcomes with CM who underwent FT sectioning. The MINORS instrument was used for methodological quality assessment. The included studies' levels of evidence (LOE) were classified according to the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine.

Results: Two studies from the same group of authors were included. We cannot assure if the cited cases in the first study were also included in their latter published study. The described results suggest that outcomes were not collected in a standardized fashion. Outcomes are described vaguely as a percentage of improvement. Case series samples were small and included not only patients with CM but also patients with scoliosis and syringomyelia. The MINORS score reported that both studies had low methodological quality. Both included studies were classified as level 4 of evidence.

Conclusion: There is no scientific support for filum terminale sectioning in patients with CM without evidence of tethered cord. This procedure may be considered experimental and should be validated in a strict criterion of inclusion clinical trial comparing outcomes in posterior fossa decompression.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10072-019-04056-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

filum terminale
12
terminale sectioning
12
posterior fossa
8
fossa decompression
8
tethered cord
8
methodological quality
8
sectioning
5
included
5
sectioning chiari
4
chiari malformation
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!