Management strategies of cranial encephaloceles: A neurosurgical challenge

Background: Encephalocele is defined as herniation of cranial contents beyond the normal confines of the skull through a defect in the calvarium either along the midline or at the base of skull. These anomalies should be repaired in the first few months of life to prevent neurological deficits and facial disfigurement. The aim of the surgery is water tight dural closure at the level of internal defect, closure of skull defect, and reconstruction of external bony deformity. Materials and Methods: Fifty-four cases of encephalocoeles were studied in our hospital over a 6-year period from 2010 to 2016. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain were performed to delineate the bony defect and associated anomalies. Reconstruction of the bony defect was done using autologous calvarial bone graft, Osteopore polycaprolactone (PCL) bone scaffold filler and titanium mesh. Results: In our study, 54 patients (34 boys and 20 girls) whose age varied between 2 months and 14 years were evaluated. Frontoethmoidal (44.5%) and occipital encephaloceles (25.9%) were the most frequently seen varieties. Repair of the dural defect either primarily or using pericranium was done in all cases. Closure of the bony defect was done using autologous calvarial bone graft in 12 (22.22%) patients. Titanium mesh was used in eight and Osteopore PCL bone scaffold filler in four children. Cranioplasty was not done in remaining thirty children because of the small bone defect. Overall, 80% had no postoperative problem and were discharged between 7 and 10 days of surgery. Cerebrospinal fluid leak was the most frequent postoperative complication, noted in five patients. Re-exploration with repair was done in one and remaining four were managed conservatively. Overall, cosmetic results were acceptably good, with parents judging the cosmetic outcome as good to excellent in 70%, satisfactory in 18%, and poor in 3% at the last follow-up. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that encephaloceles are associated with complex deformities and pose a technical challenge to the neurosurgeon. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to manage these cases. MRI brain and three dimensional CT aids in evaluating the deformity better and surgical correction should be performed as soon as possible to prevent a further neurological deficit. Repair of dural defect and reconstruction of the skull defect results in a good long-term outcome. We present our experience on 54 cases of cranial encephaloceles managed surgically over a period of only 6 years which is one of the largest series reported from Asia.

Key-words:

Encephaloceles - multidisciplinary approach - reconstruction of bony deformity

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Publication History

Article published online:
09 September 2022

• References

• 1 French BN. Midline fusion defects and defects of formation. In: Youmans JR, editor. Neurological Surgery. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1990. p. 1081-85.
• 2 McLone DG. Congenital malformations of the central nervous system. Clin Neurosurg 2000;47:346-77.
• 3 Lo BW, Kulkarni AV, Rutka JT, Jea A, Drake JM, Lamberti-Pasculli M, et al. Clinical predictors of developmental outcome in patients with cephaloceles. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2008;2:254-7.
• 4 Arora P, Mody S, Kalra VK, Altaany D, Bajaj M. Occipital meningoencephalocele in a preterm neonate. BMJ Case Rep 2012;2012. pii: bcr2012006293.
• 5 Bozinov O, Tirakotai W, Sure U, Bertalanffy H. Surgical closure and reconstruction of a large occipital encephalocele without parenchymal excision. Childs Nerv Syst 2005;21:144-7.
• 6 Suwanwela C. Geographical distribution of fronto-ethmoidal encephalomeningocele. Br J Prev Soc Med 1972;26:193-8.
• 7 Brown MS, Sheridan-Pereira M. Outlook for the child with a cephalocele. Pediatrics 1992;90:914-9.
• 8 Naidich TP, Altman NR, Braffman BH, McLone DG, Zimmerman RA. Cephaloceles and related malformations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1992;13:655-90.
• 9 Smit CS, Zeeman BJ, Smith RM, de V Cluver PF. Frontoethmoidal meningoencephaloceles: A review of 14 consecutive patients. J Craniofac Surg 1993;4:210-4.
• 10 De Klerk DJ, De Villiers JC. Frontal encephaloceles. S Afr Med J 1973;47:1350-5.
• 11 Suwanwela C, Suwanwela N. A morphological classification of sincipital encephalomeningoceles. J Neurosurg 1972;36:201-11.
• 12 Macfarlane R, Rutka JT, Armstrong D, Phillips J, Posnick J, Forte V, et al. Encephaloceles of the anterior cranial fossa. Pediatr Neurosurg 1995;23:148-58.
• 13 David DJ. Cephaloceles: Classification, pathology, and management – A review. J Craniofac Surg 1993;4:192-202.
• 14 Forcada M, Montandon D, Rilliet B. Frontoethmoidal cephaloceles: Transcranial and transfacial surgical treatment. J Craniofac Surg 1993;4:203-9.
• 15 Boonvisut S, Ladpli S, Sujatanond M, Tandhavadhana C, Tisavipat N, Luxsuwong M, et al. Morphologic study of 120 skull base defects in frontoethmoidal encephalomeningoceles. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;101:1784-95.
• 16 Holmes AD, Meara JG, Kolker AR, Rosenfeld JV, Klug GL. Frontoethmoidal encephaloceles: Reconstruction and refinements. J Craniofac Surg 2001;12:6-18.
• 17 Holm C, Thu M, Hans A, Martina M, Silvia GS, Moritz S, et al. Extracranial correction of frontoethmoidal meningoencephaloceles: Feasibility and outcome in 52 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;121:386e-395e.
• 18 Rosenfeld JV, Watters DA. Surgery in developing countries. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2008;1:108.
• 19 Hoving EW, Vermeij-Keers C. Frontoethmoidal encephaloceles, a study of their pathogenesis. Pediatr Neurosurg 1997;27:246-56.
• 20 Singh H, Singh D, Sharma D, Tandon MS, Ganjoo P. Perioperative challenges in patients with giant occipital encephalocele with microcephaly and micrognathia. J Neurosci Rural Pract 2012;3:68-70.
• 21 Agarwal A, Chandak AV, Kakani A, Reddy S. A giant occipital encephalocele. APSP J Case Rep 2010;1:16.
• 22 Mohanty A, Biswas A, Reddy M, Kolluri S. Expansile cranioplasty for massive occipital encephalocele. Childs Nerv Syst 2006;22:1170-6.