Anterior Spinal Artery Syndrome Due to Fibrocartilaginous Embolism-Case Report and Treatment Options.

Acute occlusion of the anterior spinal artery and subsequent spinal ischemic infarction leads to anterior spinal artery syndrome characterized by back pain and bilateral flaccid paresis with loss of protopathic sensibility. As a rare cause fibrocartilaginous embolism has been described and is associated with sports or unusual strain.Following gymnastic exercise the day before symptom-onset, a 11 years old girl presented with neck pain, paresis of arms and legs, and impaired deep tendon reflexes. She was unable to lift her arms, grasp, stand, walk and had urinary incontinence. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a longitudinal T2 hyperintense signal in the anterior spinal cord from C3 to C6 with accompanying bilateral diffusion restriction involving gray matter bilaterally at the level of C4 and C5 and unilaterally at the level of C3/4. The adjacent annulus fibrosus of the intervertebral disc showed a fissure without disc protrusion. Treatment with prednisolone and enoxaparin was started within 12 hours of symptom-onset and continued over 6 days and 8 weeks, respectively. After 2 months, her motor function gradually improved, spinal imaging showed persistent T2 signal hyperintense defects at the level of C4/5. After 5 months, there was only slight impairment affecting elevation and abduction of the right arm.Following physical exercise, the patient suffered from acute anterior spinal cord ischemia with imaging findings in line with a presumed fibrocartilaginous embolism. Unlike most cases, our patient showed almost complete recovery following treatment with prednisolone and enoxaparin. We speculate that the positive outcome is related to rapid treatment initiation.

Medullary Tegmental Cap Dysplasia: Fetal and Postnatal Presentations of a Unique Brainstem Malformation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Medullary tegmental cap dysplasia is a rare brainstem malformation, first described and defined by James Barkovich in his book Pediatric Neuroimaging from 2005 as an anomalous mass protruding from the posterior medullary surface. We describe the neuroimaging, clinical, postmortem, and genetic findings defining this unique malformation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, international, retrospective study. We assessed the patients' medical records, prenatal ultrasounds, MR images, genetic findings, and postmortem results. We reviewed the medical literature for all studies depicting medullary malformations and evaluated cases in which a dorsal medullary protuberance was described. RESULTS: We collected 13 patients: 3 fetuses and 10 children. The medullary caps had multiple characteristics. Associated brain findings were a rotated position of the medulla, a small and flat pons, cerebellar anomalies, a molar tooth sign, and agenesis of the corpus callosum. Systemic findings included the following: polydactyly, hallux valgus, large ears, and coarse facies. Postmortem analysis in 3 patients revealed that the cap contained either neurons or white matter tracts. We found 8 publications describing a dorsal medullary protuberance in 27 patients. The syndromic diagnosis was Joubert-Boltshauser syndrome in 11 and fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva in 14 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to describe a series of 13 patients with medullary tegmental cap dysplasia. The cap has different shapes: distinct in Joubert-Boltshauser syndrome and fibrodysplasia ossificans progressive. Due to the variations in the clinical, imaging, and postmortem findings, we conclude that there are multiple etiologies and pathophysiology. We suggest that in some patients, the pathophysiology might be abnormal axonal guidance.

Are there differences between macrocyclic gadolinium contrast agents for brain tumor imaging? Results of a multicenter intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobutrol with gadoteridol (the TRUTH study).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Gadobutrol (Gadavist) and gadoteridol (ProHance) have similar macrocyclic molecular structures, but gadobutrol is formulated at a 2-fold higher (1 mol/L versus 0.5 mol/L) concentration. We sought to determine whether this difference impacts morphologic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-nine adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors underwent two 1.5T MR imaging examinations with gadoteridol or gadobutrol administered in randomized order at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg of body weight. Imaging sequences and T1 postinjection timing were identical for both examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images qualitatively and quantitatively for lesion detection and for accuracy in characterization of histologically confirmed brain tumors. Data were analyzed by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, the McNemar test, and a mixed model. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients successfully completed both examinations. No reader noted a significant qualitative or quantitative difference in lesion enhancement, extent, delineation, or internal morphology (P values = .69-1.00). One hundred thirty-nine patients had at least 1 histologically confirmed brain lesion. Two readers found no difference in the detection of patients with lesions (133/139 versus 135/139, P = .317; 137/139 versus 136/139, P = .564), while 1 reader found minimal differences in favor of gadoteridol (136/139 versus 132/139, P = .046). Similar findings were noted for the number of lesions detected and characterization of tumors (malignant/benign). Three-reader agreement for characterization was similar for gadobutrol (66.4% [κ = 0.43]) versus gadoteridol (70.3% [κ = 0.45]). There were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events (P = .199). CONCLUSIONS: Gadoteridol and gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg of body weight provide similar information for visualization and diagnosis of brain lesions. The 2-fold higher gadolinium concentration of gadobutrol provides no benefit for routine morphologic imaging.