You are in:Home/Publications/New Technique: Paravertebral Muscle Refashioning In Meningiomyelocele Repair

Dr. Mohamed mohsen baioumy elmaghraby :: Publications:

New Technique: Paravertebral Muscle Refashioning In Meningiomyelocele Repair
Authors: Mohamed M Elmaghrabi, MD, Moataz A Elawady, MD and Ahmed A Arab, MD
Year: 2017
Keywords: paravertebral muscle refashioning, meningiomyelocele repair.
Journal: Not Available
Volume: Not Available
Issue: Not Available
Pages: Not Available
Publisher: Not Available
Local/International: International
Paper Link: Not Available
Full paper Mohamed mohsen baioumy elmaghraby_MM manuscript.docx
Supplementary materials Not Available

Background: One of the most complications of meningiomyelocele surgical repair is early postoperative Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage. Cystic back swelling due to prolonged sitting of children is an annoying symptom of their parents. Objective: To assess the technique of paravertebral muscle refashioning in meningiomyelocele repair as a protective layer of opened spinal canal. Study design: A prospective clinical trial study of 46 infants, 25 boys and 21 girls, with meningiomyelocele which was repaired surgically using paravertebral muscle refashioning technique in 18 infants (group I) while 28 infants without this technique (group II) at Benha University and Benha children Hospitals through the period from May 2013 to April 2017. The mean period of follow up was (18.27±2.78 months). Methods: Comparison was performed between two groups by analysis of early postoperative CSF subcutaneous swelling and late pulsatile cystic swelling of repaired defect. Results: Forty six infants were studied, 25 boys (54.3%) and 21 girls (45.7%) with mean age 29.7±15.39 days (ranging from 1 to 90 days), and they were followed up with a mean of 18.27±2.78 months (ranging from 12 to 24 months). Early postoperative CSF leakage was absent in 72.8% of group I and 71.4% of group II which was statistically non significant between two techniques while late cystic back swelling was not detected in 88.9% of group I and only 32.1% of group II which was statistically significant (P

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus