Clinical Features, Imaging Characteristics, and Long-term Outcome of Dogs with Cranial Meningocele or Meningoencephalocele



Lazzerini, K, Gutierrez-Quintana, R, José-López, R, McConnell, F, Gonçalves, R, McMurrough, J, De Decker, S, Muir, C, Priestnall, SL, Mari, L
et al (show 12 more authors) (2017) Clinical Features, Imaging Characteristics, and Long-term Outcome of Dogs with Cranial Meningocele or Meningoencephalocele Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, 31 (2). pp. 505-512. ISSN 0891-6640, 1939-1676

Access the full-text of this item by clicking on the Open Access link.
[thumbnail of Clinical Features, Imaging Characteristics, and Long-term Outcome of Dogs with Cranial Meningocele or Meningoencephalocele.pdf] Text
Clinical Features, Imaging Characteristics, and Long-term Outcome of Dogs with Cranial Meningocele or Meningoencephalocele.pdf - Published version

Download (781kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: The term meningoencephalocele (MEC) describes a herniation of cerebral tissue and meninges through a defect in the cranium, whereas a meningocele (MC) is a herniation of the meninges alone. Hypothesis/Objectives: To describe the clinical features, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics, and outcomes of dogs with cranial MC and MEC. Animals: Twenty-two client-owned dogs diagnosed with cranial MC or MEC. Methods: Multicentric retrospective descriptive study. Clinical records of 13 institutions were reviewed. Signalment, clinical history, neurologic findings and MRI characteristics as well as treatment and outcome were recorded and evaluated. Results: Most affected dogs were presented at a young age (median, 6.5 months; range, 1 month – 8 years). The most common presenting complaints were seizures and behavioral abnormalities. Intranasal MEC was more common than parietal MC. Magnetic resonance imaging identified meningeal enhancement of the protruded tissue in 77% of the cases. Porencephaly was seen in all cases with parietal MC. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis identified mild abnormalities in 4 of 11 cases. Surgery was not performed in any affected dog. Seventeen patients were treated medically, and seizures were adequately controlled with anti-epileptic drugs in 10 dogs. Dogs with intranasal MEC and mild neurologic signs had a fair prognosis with medical treatment. Conclusion and clinical importance: Although uncommon, MC and MEC should be considered as a differential diagnosis in young dogs presenting with seizures or alterations in behavior. Medical treatment is a valid option with a fair prognosis when the neurologic signs are mild.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Cerebral malformation, Cranioschisis, Porencephaly, Seizures
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 13 May 2019 10:34
Last Modified: 24 Jan 2026 01:05
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.14638
Open Access URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.14638
Related Websites:
URI: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3041047
Disclaimer: The University of Liverpool is not responsible for content contained on other websites from links within repository metadata. Please contact us if you notice anything that appears incorrect or inappropriate.