You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Rare disease
CASE REPORT
Incomplete cauda equina syndrome secondary to haemorrhage within a Tarlov cyst
  1. Joseph R Yates1,
  2. Conor S Jones1,2,
  3. Oliver M Stokes3,
  4. Michael Hutton3
  1. 1 Medical School, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, Devon, UK
  2. 2 Medical School, Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, Exeter, Devon, UK
  3. 3 Exeter Spine Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, Devon, UK
  1. Correspondence to Oliver M Stokes, oliverstokes{at}hotmail.com

Summary

Sacral perineural (Tarlov) cysts are benign, cerebrospinal fluid containing lesions of the spinal nerve root sheath. They are usually asymptomatic; however, a small proportion have the potential to cause compression of nerve roots and/or the cauda equina.

We report a case of a 61-year-old man who presented with acute onset back pain associated with bilateral radiculopathy. Between referral and consultation, the patient developed urinary dysfunction which resolved spontaneously.

MRI revealed haemorrhage within a Tarlov cyst, resulting in compression of the cauda equina. Due to the considerable clinical improvement at the time of consultation, surgical decompression of the cyst was not considered to be indicated.

An interval MRI scan 8 weeks later demonstrated that the haemorrhage within the perineural cyst had spontaneously resolved and the patient remained asymptomatic at 5-year follow-up.

  • spinal cord
  • orthopaedics
  • orthopaedic and trauma surgery

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2017-219890

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors JRY, CSJ, OMS and MH were responsible for conception and design. JRY, CSJ, OMS and MH were responsible for interpretation of data. JRY and CSJ were responsible for drafting of the article. MH and OMS were responsible for revising the article critically for important intellectual content. JRY, CSJ, OMS and MH were responsible for approving the final manuscript. CSJ and JRY contributed equally to this manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Obtained.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.