Home
About Us
Issues
Authors
Reviewers
Users
Subscription
Our Other Journals
Site map
Aims and Scope
Salient Features
Editorial Board
Editorial Statements
Editorial-PeerReview Process
Publication Ethics & Malpractice
Ijars Performance
Journal Policy
Contact Us
Current Issue
Forthcoming
Article Archive
Access Statistics
Simple Search
Advanced Search
Submit an Article
Instructions
Assistance
Publication Fee
Paid Services
Apply As Reviewer
Acknowledgment
Register Here Edit Register
Register For Article Submission
Login Here Logout
Login For Article Submission
Annual
Buy One Issue
Payment Options
How to Order
JCDR
IJNMR
NJLM

 

Welcome : Guest

Users Online :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviews

Year :2021 Month : September-October Volume : 10 Issue : 4 Page : RR01 - RR07 Full Version

Imaging in Spinal Dysraphism- A Pictoral Assay


Anurudh Kishore Vatti, Swarnalatha Seelam, Vineela Rekha Vidavaluru
1. Senior Resident, Department of Radiology, ESIC Superspeciality Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, ESIC Superspeciality Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 3. Senior Resident, Department of Radiology, ESIC Superspeciality Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
 
Correspondence Address :
Anurudh Kishore Vatti,
ESIC Superspeciality Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
E-mail: anurudh.kishore@gmail.com
 
ABSTRACT

: Spinal dysraphism includes the congenital malformations of the spine and spinal cord. Spinal cord development takes place through successive stages of gastrulation, primary neurulation, and secondary neurulation. Defect in any of these three phases can lead to spinal dysraphism. The embryological classification of spinal dysraphism consists of anomalies of gastrulation, anomalies of primary neurulation, combined anomalies of gastrulation, primary neurulation and anomalies of secondary neurulation. Clinico-radiologic classification of spinal dysraphism consists of open and closed types. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is considered as the gold standard for identifying these disorders. By using the clinical, neuroradiological, and development data systematically an accurate diagnosis can be reached. In this article, authors revise the normal development of the spinal cord and spine and discuss the embryologic classification by illustrating the diverse MRI findings of various spinal dysraphism.
Keywords : Congenital malformations, Gastrulation, Magnetic resonance imaging, Primary neurulation, Secondary neurulation
DOI and Others : 10.7860/IJARS/2021/46182:2721

Date of Submission: Sep 28, 2020
Date of Peer Review: Nov 28, 2020
Date of Acceptance: Feb 20, 2021
Date of Publishing: Oct 01, 2021

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? No
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
 
INTRODUCTION

Spinal dysraphism includes the congenital abnormalities of the spine and spinal cord. Abnormal midline closure of bony, mesenchymal, and nervous tissue leads to the formation of these heterogeneous groups of anomalies (1). The usual age at diagnosis is at birth or early infancy but few are detected at a later age due to the absence of clinical manifestations. The inherent advanced soft-tissue resolution and multiparametric imaging capability of MRI allow easier, rapid, and more precise diagnosis of these disorders, thus enabling early detection and case-tailored management (2). By analysis of the clinical, neuroradiological, and development data systematically, an accurate diagnosis can be reached.

Embryology (A Quick Recap of Spinal Cord Development)

Spinal cord development occurs in three basic embryologic steps (3),(4). They include gastrulation (2-3 weeks), primary neurulation (3-4 weeks) and secondary neurulation (5-6 weeks). In gastrulation, the embryonic disc from a bilaminar disc is transformed into a trilaminar dics (composed of ectoderm, mesoderm and endoderm) (Table/Fig 1)a,b (5). In primary neurulation, notochord and overlying ectoderm interact to form neural plate. The neural plate then arches, folds and closes in a zipper like manner birectionally to form the neural tube (Table/Fig 2)a,b (5). In secondary neurulation, secondary neural tube is formed from caudal cell mass, which is solid initially and subsequently undergoes cavitation.It forms tip of conus medullaris and filum terminale by retrogressive differentiation (Table/Fig 3)a,b,c (5). Abnormalities in any of the above stages can lead to spine and spinal cord malformations.

Predisposing Factors

• Nutritional factors: Cytochalasin ingestion, a metabolite of the fungus Phytophthora infestans (found in blighted potatoes), deficiency of folic acid or zinc, high nitrates (eg, nitrate-cured meats, bore and ground water), and deficiency or excess vitamin A (6),(7).

• Multifactorial with genetic (Chromosomal and single-gene abnormalities) and environmental factors playing a role (8).

• An altered carbohydrate metabolism has been reported in mothers of children with spinal dysraphism, especially those with sacral agenesis (9).

• In consanguineous marriage there is a 3-fold increased incidence and more in monozygotic twins. There is 50% likelyhood of 2nd child being affected if the first child is affected and 100% likelyhood if two children are affected (10).

Incidence

Spinal dysraphism affect approximately 1 per 1000 live-born infants. Open spinal dysraphism occur more frequently than closed and among the open type, myelomeningocele is the most common (8).

Classification

Based on studies by Tortori and Caffey, spinal dysraphism is classified according to the embryological events (Table/Fig 4) (4),(11),(12).

Clinico-radiologically, based on the presence of overlying skin, spinal dysraphism is classified as open and closed types (13),(14),(15). Overlying skin is absent and the neural elements are exposed to the external environment in open type while, in closed type, the skin is intact. Based on the presence of subcutaneous mass closed spinal dysraphism can be further divided (Table/Fig 5),(Table/Fig 6).

1. Gastrulation Related Abnormalities

The spinal cord and various structures derived from notochord are affected by abnormal gastrulation (16). Most of these abnormalities are covered by skin and with no subcutaneous mass. Disorders of midline notochordal integration and disorders of notochordal formation come under this category.

A. Disorders of Notochordal Formation

Caudal agenesis and segmental spinal dysgenesis are disorders of notochordal formation and occur as a result of abnormal apoptosis (17).

Caudal agenesis (CA): It may lead to total or partial agenesis of the spinal column. Commonly associated other anomalies are the genital anomalies, pulmonary hypoplasia, anal imperforation, renal aplasia or dysplasia, and limb abnormalities. CA is divided into two types:

Type I CA: Caudal cell mass and notochord formation are affected. There are high position and abnormal termination of conus medullaris(most commonly at the level of D12 vertebra). Vertebral aplasia of varying degree is seen.

Type II CA: Only caudal cell mass is affected while notochord formation is unaffected. Hence, only secondary neurulation is defective with normal primary neurulation. Consequently, only the caudal part of conus medullaris is absent. Vertebral dysgenesis is less severe. Patients present with tethered cord syndrome as the conus in these cases is stretched and tethered (18),(19).

Segmental spinal dysgenesis: It is a rare notochordal abnormality occurring due involvement of the intermediate segment of notochord during gastrulation (Table/Fig 7),(Table/Fig 8) (17),(20). Characterised by segmental agenesis or dysgenesis of the lumbar or thoracolumbar spine and spinal cord or nerve roots. The child presents with congenital paraparesis or paraplegia with or without associated congenital lower limb deformities.

B. Disorders of Midline Notochordal Integration

Midline notochordal integration is a process where paired notochord anlagen fuse to form a single midline notochord process (3). Longitudinal splitting of the spinal cord occurs due to abnormality in this step. Neurenteric cyst and diastematomyelia are the common entities of this category.

Neurenteric cyst: Dorsalenteric fistula is a persistent communication between ectoderm (External skin) and endoderm (Intestine).Among disorders of midline notochord integration it is the rare and most severe form. It is a persistent communication between ectoderm (skin surface) and endoderm (bowel). Neuroenteric cysts are trapped remnants of the middle portion of this communication. It is a localised form of dorsal enteric fistula. They are usually intradural and extramedullary in location. Most commonly located in the cervicothoracic region, may be seen in other locations also (21). They are present anterior to the cervical spinal cord with associated adjacent vertebral anomalies. On T1 and T2 weighted MR images, they appear isointense to hyperintense to CSF (due to high protein content) with absent contrast enhancement (22),(23).

Diastematomyelia: Defective midline notochord integration leads to a single midline notochord being replaced by a paired notochordal process which are separated by intervening primitive streak cells. Each “heminotochord” induces a separate “hemi”-neural plate.

Each “Hemi”-neural plate, in turn, forms a “Hemi”-neural tube, thus resulting in the formation of two hemicords. The intervening primitive streak tissue, which is a totipotent tissue decides the type of diastematomyelia. In type I diastematomyelia,it differentiates into cartilage and bone,so the two hemicords lie in individual dural sacs separated by osteocartilagenous spur (Table/Fig 9),(Table/Fig 10). Whereas in type II diastematomyelia,it is resorbed,so the single dural sac encases the two hemicords (Table/Fig 11),(Table/Fig 12) (24). Associated vertebral anomalies and hydromyelia may be present. One of the reliable clinical indicators for underlying diastematomyelia is the presence of a high lying hairy tuft over a child’s back (25).

2. Primary Neurulation Related Abnormalities

A. Premature Dysjunction

Premature dysjunction of the neural tube from the overlying ectoderm leads to the interposition of perineural mesenchyme between the neural tube and ectoderm, which differentiates into fat and prevents complete neural tube closure. The lipomatous malformation spectrum of lipomyelocele, lipomyelomeningocele, and spinal lipomas come under this category (11).

Lipomyelocele and lipomyelomeningocele: Lipomyelocele and lipomyelomeningocele fall under the category of lipomas with a dural defect. As a consequence of premature focal disjunction of the neural tube from the surface ectoderm, the mesenchymal tissue intrudes into the neural tube. The adipomatous tissue is formed from this mesenchymal tissue due to factors not known (26). Patients present clinically with a subcutaneous swelling above the intergluteal crease.The major distinguishing feature between the lipomyelocele and lipomyelomeningocele is the location of the neural placode-lipoma interface. It is situated within the spinal canal in a lipomyelocele (Table/Fig 13), while in lipomyelomeningocele it is situated outside the spinal canal as a consequence of the expansion of the subarachnoid space (Table/Fig 14),(Table/Fig 15) (14). T1 and T2 weighted images show the continuity between the dorsal surface of placode with subcutaneous fat, with signal suppression on the fat-saturated images.

Intradural lipoma: It is a lipoma situated on the midline dorsal aspect of the spinal cord within an unbreached dural sac. The unbreached dural sac distinguishes it from lipomyelocele and lipomyelomeningocele. Lumbosacral region is the most common site of location and tethered cord syndrome is the most common clinical presentation. On MRI, they have a signal intensity similar to subcutaneous fat on all the sequences (13).

Filar lipoma: It is the fibrolipomatous thickening of the filum terminale. It follows the signal intensity of fat on all the MR sequences (12). It is considered a normal variant unless associated with tethered cord syndrome (27),(28).

B. Nondysjunction

Failure of separation of the neural tube from overlying ectoderm results in an ectoderm-neuroectoderm communication that blocks the mesenchymal migration. As a consequence, the open neural tube defect spectrum of the dorsal dermal sinus, myelomeningocele, and meningocele is formed.

Dorsal dermal sinus: It is an epithelium lined fistulous tract connecting neural tissue or meninges with the cutaneous surface. Lumbosacral region is the most common site of location. They are commonly associated with an intraspinal dermoid cyst. Patients present clinically with cutaneous markers like hairy nevus, midline dimple, or capillary hemangioma (29). Meningitis is the most severe complication due to the presence of external communication.

Myelomeningocele and myelocele: Myelomeningocele and myelocele are the open neural tube defects in which the neural placode is exposed through the midline skin defect on the back. Myelomeningocele constitutes 98% of all the open spinal dysraphism. In myelomeningocele the neural placode extrudes above the skin surface, presenting clinically as a midline reddish mass (3). Myelocele is a rare anomaly. The major distinguishing feature between myelomeningocele and myelocele is the position of the neural placode. In myelocele, it is flush with the skin surface (Table/Fig 16), but extrudes over the skin surface due to expansion of the subarachnoid space in myelomeningocele (Table/Fig 17),(Table/Fig 18),(Table/Fig 19) (30). Almost all the patients have an associated Chiari II malformation and about 80% have hydrocephalus (Table/Fig 20) (3),(4).

3. Combined Anomalies of Gastrulation and Primary Neurulation

Hemimyelomeningocele and hemimyelocele

Hemimyelomeningoceles and hemimyeloceles are remarkably rare anomalies. They occur when a myelomeningocele or myelocele are associated with diastematomyelia and one hemicord fails to neurulate (Table/Fig 21),(Table/Fig 22).

4. Anomalies of Secondary Neurulation/Anomalies of the Caudal Cell Mass

Low lying cord: Spinal cord position below L2-L3 level after the first month in a term infant is “abnormally low lying”. Axial T1 weighted images are used for knowing the actual position of the conus (31).

Persistent terminal ventricle/fifth ventricle: It is the small ependymal lined cavity within the conus medullaris. It is the reminant of the lumen of the neural tube formed by the secondary neurulation. Absent contrast enhancement and the location just above filum terminale are the characteristic imaging findings and distinguish it from other cystic lesions of conus medullaris (Table/Fig 23) (32).

Tethered Cord Syndrome (TCS): Clinical manifestations included in TCS are gait spasticity, low back pain, leg pain, sensory abnormalities of the lower extremity, and/or bladder abnormalities. A low lying cord with thick filum terminale (>1.5 mm) is the key imaging finding (Table/Fig 24).

Intrasacral-anterior sacral meningocele: It is the arachnoid lined sac located in the enlarged sacral spinal canal. It is connected to the caudal end of the dural sac by an opening that allows the passage of CSF from the subarachnoid space.
 
 
Conclusion

Congenital malformations of the spine and spinal cord have a complex and variable imaging appearance. A meticulous approach with consideration of clinical, developmental data along with the proper interpretation of imaging findings helps in precise diagnosis.
 
REFERENCES
1.
French BN. The embryology of spinal dysraphism. Clin Neurosurg. 1983;30:295-340.   [Google Scholar]
2.
Rossi A, Cama A, Piatelli G, Ravegnani M, Biancheri R, Tortori-Donati P. Spinal dysraphism: MR imaging rationale. J Neuroradiol. 2004;31(1):03-24.   [Google Scholar]
3.
Tortori-Donati P, Rossi A, Cama A. Spinal dysraphism: A review of neuroradiological features with embryological correlations and proposal for a new classification. Neuroradiology. 2000;42:471-91.   [Google Scholar]
4.
Barkovich AJ. Pediatric neuroradiology, 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Willims & Wilkins, 2011: pp. 857-916.   [Google Scholar]
5.
Tortori-Donati P, Rossi A, Biancheri R (2005a) Brain malformations. In: TortoriDonati P (ed) Pediatric neuroradiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York.   [Google Scholar]
6.
Medical Research Council. MRC Vitamin Study Research Group. Prevention of neural tube defects: Results of the Medical Research Council vitamin study. Lancet. 1991;338:131-37.   [Google Scholar]
7.
Medical Research Council. MRC randomized controlled trial use of multivitamins and folic acid for the prevention of recurrence of neural tube defects. Lancet. 1991;338:153-54.   [Google Scholar]
8.
Text book of Pediatric surgery 7th Ed, Arnold G.Coran, N.Scott Adzick, Thomas M.Krummel, Jean martin laberge, Anthony Caldamone, Robert Shamberger Chapter 128 Pg 1673,1675.   [Google Scholar]
9.
Kitzmiller JL, Buchanan TA, Kjos S, Combs CA, Ratner RE. Preconception care of diabetes, congenital malformations, and spontaneous abortions. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:514-41.   [Google Scholar]
10.
Thunem NY, Lowry RB, Tucher BM, Medd BW. Birth prevalence and recurrence rates of neural tube defects in southern Alberta in 1970-1981. Can Med Assoc J. 1988;138:819-23.   [Google Scholar]
11.
Moore K. Congenital Abnormalities of the Spine In: Coley BD, editor. Caffey’s Pediatric Diagnostic Imaging. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2013. Pp. 449-60.   [Google Scholar]
12.
Acharya UV, Pendharkar H, Varma DR, Pruthi N,Varadarajan S. Spinal dysraphism illustrated; Embroyology revisited. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2017;27:417-26.   [Google Scholar]
13.
Tortori-Donati P, Rossi A, Biancheri R, Cama A. Magnetic resonance imaging of spinal dysraphism. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;12:375-409.   [Google Scholar]
14.
Rossi A, Biancheri R, Cama A, Piatelli G, Ravegnani M, TortoriDonati P. Imaging in spine and spinal cord malformations. Eur J Radiol. 2004;50:177-200.   [Google Scholar]
15.
Thompson D. Spinal dysraphic anomalies; classification, presentation and management. Paediatrics and Child Health. 2010;20:397-403.   [Google Scholar]
16.
Dias MS, Walker ML. The embryogenesis of complex dysraphic malformations: A disorder of gastrulation? Pediatr Neurosurg. 1992;18:229-53.   [Google Scholar]
17.
Tortori-Donati P, Fondelli MP, Rossi A, Raybaud CA, Cama A, Capra V. Segmental spinal dysgenesis: Neuroradiologic findings with clinical and embryologic correlation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1999;20:445-56.   [Google Scholar]
18.
Estin D, Cohen AR. Caudal agenesis and associated caudal spinal cord malformations. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1995;6:377-91.   [Google Scholar]
19.
Rufener SL, Ibrahim M, Raybaud CA, Parmar HA. Congenital spine and spinal cord malformations-pictorial review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:S26-37.   [Google Scholar]
20.
Zana E, Chalard F, Mazda K, Sebag G. An atypical case of segmental spinal dysgenesis. Pediatr Radiol. 2005;35:914-17.   [Google Scholar]
21.
Harris CP, Dias MS, Brockmeyer DL, Townsend JJ, Willis BK, Apfelbaum RI. Neurenteric cysts of the posterior fossa: Recognition, management, and embryogenesis. Neurosurgery. 1991;29:893-97; discussion 897-898.   [Google Scholar]
22.
Rufener S, Ibrahim M, Parmar HA. Imaging of congenital spine and spinal cord malformations. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2011;21:659-76.   [Google Scholar]
23.
Simon JA, Olan WJ, Santi M. Intracranial neurenteric cysts: A differential diagnosis and review. Radiographics. 1997;17:1587-93.   [Google Scholar]
24.
Pang D, Dias MS, Ahab-Barmada M. Split cord malformation: Part I: A unified theory of embryogenesis for double spinal cord malformations. Neurosurgery. 1992;31:451-80.   [Google Scholar]
25.
Barkovich AJ, Edwards Ms, Cogen PH. MR evaluation of spinal dermal sinus tracts in children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1991;12:123-29.   [Google Scholar]
26.
Naidich TP, McLone DG, Mutluer S. A new understanding of dorsal dysraphism with lipoma (lipomyeloschisis): Radiologic evaluation and surgical correction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1983;140:1065-78.   [Google Scholar]
27.
Uchino A, Mori T, Ohno M. Thickened fatty filum terminale: MR imaging. Neuroradiology. 1991;33:331-33.   [Google Scholar]
28.
Brown E, Matthes JC, Bazan C, Jinkins JR. Prevalence of incidental intraspinal lipoma of the lumbosacral spine as determined by MRI. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994;19:833-36.   [Google Scholar]
29.
Scotti G, Harwood-Nash DC, Hoffman HJ. Congenital thoracic dermal sinuses: Diagnosis by computer-assisted metrizamide myelography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1980;4(5):675-77.   [Google Scholar]
30.
Naidich TP, Blaser SI, Delman BN. Congenital Anomalies of the Spine and Spinal Cord: Embryology and Malformations. In: Atlas SW eds. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain and Spine, 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009:1364-1447.   [Google Scholar]
31.
Widjaja E, Whitby EH, Paley MN, Griffiths PD. Normal fetal lumbar spine on postmortem MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27:553-59.   [Google Scholar]
32.
Coleman LT, Zimmerman RA, Rorke LB. Ventriculus terminalis of the conus medullaris: MR findings in children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1995;16(7):1421-26.  [Google Scholar]
 
TABLES AND FIGURES
[Table/Fig-1] [Table/Fig-2] [Table/Fig-3] [Table/Fig-4] [Table/Fig-5]
[Table/Fig-6] [Table/Fig-7] [Table/Fig-8] [Table/Fig-9] [Table/Fig-10] [Table/Fig-11] [Table/Fig-12] [Table/Fig-13] [Table/Fig-14] [Table/Fig-15] [Table/Fig-16] [Table/Fig-17] [Table/Fig-18] [Table/Fig-19] [Table/Fig-20] [Table/Fig-21] [Table/Fig-22] [Table/Fig-23] [Table/Fig-24]
 
 
 

In This Article

  • Abstract
  • Material and Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References

Article Utilities

  • Readers Comments
  • Article in PDF
  • Citation Manager
  • How to Cite
  • Article Statistics
  • Link to PUBMED
  • Print this Article
  • Send to a Friend

Quick Links

REVIEWER
ACCESS STATISTICS
Home  |  About Us  |  Online First  |  Current Issue  |  Simple Search  |  Advance Search  |  Register  |  Login  |  Contact  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Author Support  |  Submit Manuscript  |  IJARS Pre-Publishing  |  Reviewer  |  Articles Archive  |  Access Statistics
©INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANATOMY RADIOLOGY & SURGERY (IJARS), ISSN : 2277-8543.
EDITORIAL OFFICE : 1/9, Roop Nagar, Delhi 11000. Phone : 01123848553

* This Journal is owned and run by medical professionals *