Abstract
Background and importance
Giant Tarlov cysts (GTCs) are perineural cysts and their presacral intrapelvic extension are extremely rare entities. We present a case of GTC with intrapelvic extension who has preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) follow-ups of 12 years, and we demonstrate the annual growth rate and the time-size correlation of a GTC.
Methods
Case report.
Clinical presentation
A 37-year-old woman was admitted with left gluteal pain radiating to left foot, left leg numbness, progressed over 12 years. On MRI, starting from the L5–S1 level, a giant Tarlov cyst with an atypical configuration, is observed. The patient had a known sacral Tarlov cyst, first discovered on MRI obtained 12 years before the surgery. She had 6 consecutive MRI follow-ups in 12 years preoperatively. The cysts diameters have been measured and the growth rate was estimated. We showed for the first time that presented GTC grows in in both Sagittal Diagonal (SD) and Sagittal Craniocaudal (SC) diameters over time with overall annual growth rates, 7.671% for RGR_SD and 6.237% for RGR_SC.
Conclusion
When the time-size correlation is observed, it becomes evident that the GTSs’ growing speed increases over the years because of minimal resistance in the intrapelvic cavity. Early surgery may be considered to prevent rapid growth in the intrapelvic cavity and to reduce possible complications of the giant cyst.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Background and importance
Tarlov cysts (TCs) were first described by Tarlov [1]. Spinal Meningeal cysts (MCs) are classified into three categories; Type I MCs do not have spinal nerve root fibers, while Type II MCs have them. In Type III, MCs are intradural. TCs were named Type II meningeal cysts by Nabors and colleagues in 1988 [2]. The TC can expand due to cerebro spinal fluid pressure, which can cause stretching or compression of the sacral nerve roots. This can ultimately lead to progressive painful radiculopathy, sacral nerve root dysfunction or localized pain [3]. Bladder and sexual dysfunction, as well as symptoms related to the perineal area or the gastrointestinal system, may also be observed [4].
The etiology remains unclear and may be congenital or acquired, secondary to trauma, infection, inflammation, or iatrogenic causes [5].
Giant Tarlov cysts (GTCs) are exceptionally rare, although TCs are seen at a rate of 4.6%, and only 1% of these cases present with symptoms in adults. In GTCs, common symptoms include back pain and radicular findings [6]. They grow and extend into pelvis. There is a fistula path associated with the cysts content and the subarachnoid space and this path continues with the perineural structures that surround the nerve roots [7]. Intrapelvic cystic extensions may exceed 10 cm in diameter, and these patients may experience symptoms related to abdominal complaints such as abdominal pain and ureteral compression. When the cyst exceeds the boundaries of the sacral bone, its growth may accelerate.
We did not find any data about the growth rate of a GTC in the English literature. Here, we present a case of GTC with intrapelvic extension who has preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) follow-ups of twelve years, and we demonstrate the annual growth rate and the time-size correlation of a GTC.
Clinical presentation
A 37-year-old woman was admitted with left gluteal pain radiating to left foot, left leg numbness, progressed over 12 years. Her left leg numbness and severe pain is constant and aggravated when do up shoelace. On neurologic exam, her left S1 innervated muscles were slightly weak, left Achill reflex was absent contrary to the hyperreflexia on right Achill, her straight leg raising test was negative bilaterally. On MRI, starting from the L5-S1 level, a giant Tarlov cyst with an atypical configuration, filling and expanding the sacrum, especially in the left half, extending to the presacral area on the left with an extraspinal component, thin-walled in multiloculated character, isointense with CSF in all sequences, is observed. The patient had a known sacral TC, first discovered on an MRI obtained 12 years before. She had 6 MRI follow-ups in 12 years. MRIs belong to 12, 9, 6, 3 years, and 6 and 2 months before surgery. It is clear that the cyst has grown in years and reached to an intrapelvic giant mass (Fig. 1).
Treatment plan and case follow-up
During the operation, only the posterior approach was performed in the prone Trendelenburg position. After opening the dorsolumbar fascia, left S1–S4 laminectomy was performed. The neck of the inferior cyst was opened by dissecting it from the nerve roots, and the defect in the left medial wall of the dura, which had active CSF leakage and filled the inferior cyst, was repaired with muscle grafts. Later, the superior cyst was opened at the S1–S2 level. Anterior dissection of the cyst allowed visualization of the cyst neck associated with the intrapelvic region. Then, the S1 nerve root sheath was opened, and flow was allowed into the cyst around the rootlets. CSF flow was restored with muscle grafts. Pain and numbness complaints completely disappeared in the postoperative period. On neurological examination, left S1 innervated muscle weakness disappeared and no deficit was detected. He could walk long distances without complaint. On MRI, the intrapelvic cyst completely disappeared. It has been followed for 24 months without any complaints.
Radiological follow ups and growth rate measurements
Method
We evaluated 12 years of 6 MRI follow-ups. The Sagittal Diagonal (SD) and Sagittal Craniocaudal (SC) maximum lengths at each MRI-date were used to calculate the size of the cyst at the given date. Maximum length of the SD axis was measured at 45° angle and SC axis was measured at 90° angle on sagittal T2WI sections (Fig. 2).
The annual relative growth rate was then calculated separately for SD and SC lengths. The Relative Growth Rate (RGR) of the cyst was calculated using the formula:
where W1 and W2 are the maximum lengths at consecutive MRI dates and t2–t1 is the time between consecutive MRIs. This formula is the classical method for calculating plant growth in biology and was adapted to this case [8]. MATLAB was utilized for calculations and creating graphical representations, ensuring in-depth analysis. Microsoft Excel was used for table creation, ensuring clear and concise presentation.
Result
Table 1 is a summary of the data and provides a detailed breakdown of the annual RGR values for each MRI period, presenting the annual RGRs for both the SC (RGR_SC) and Sagittal Diagonal (RGR_SD) axes (Table 1). All calculations and evaluations demonstrated that the cyst grows in both directions over time and the line representing the diagonal length ascends more rapidly than the line for craniocaudal length (Fig. 3).
The first values for RGR_SC and RGR_SD are 0, due to the absence of preceding data for length comparison. The overall annual growth rates, 7.671% for RGR_SD and 6.237% for RGR_SC, represent the annual growth observed between the first and last MRIs. These annual growth rates aren’t the averages of the five RGR values but rather the annual RGR within the irregular time intervals in 12 years. The cyst grows 2,1 times in the craniocaudal and 2,5 in the diagonal axis over 12 years.
Figures 2 and 3 demonstrates that the annual growth rate of the cyst (Figs. 4 and 5). The x-axis spans MRI dates, while the y-axis portrays the annual relative growth rate, offering a visualnarrative of the cysts behavior over time. In the Sagittal Diagonal axis in Fig. 2, the line shows a parabolic upward inclination. When the time-size correlation is observed, it becomes evident that the cyst growing speed increases over the years in the SD axis. In the SC axis in Fig. 3, the line the growth rate is fluctuating yet consistently positive, signifying continuous growth at varying speeds.
Discussion
The study spanned 12 years and utilized MRI data to evaluate the growth of a giant Tarlov cyst. Measurements were taken along the SD and SC axes at different angles. The volume calculations were not made due to its irregular shape and insufficient data. The annual RGR for both axes were calculated using a classical growth formula adapted for this case as 7.671% for RGR_SD and 6.237% for RGR_SC. The results showed that the cyst grew in both directions, with the SD axis exhibiting a faster growth rate. In the SC axis, the line the growth rate is fluctuating yet consistently positive, signifying continuous growth at varying speeds. This could be due to the bone shape and anatomy of the patient as the cyst growing speed decreases when it reaches the pelvic floor and is limited to bone and pelvic floor boundaries. Although these calculations were made in only one case, this provides us a reliable clue about the growth of a GTCs. These calculations need to be confirmed and refined with later research with a case series.
TCs tend to grow even though they are in a narrow volume within the bony structures of the sacrum, which limits their growth. Yang et al. demonstrated that growth of lumbosacral perineural TCs and their natural history [9, 10]. This is the only study shows the growth rate of TCs in the English literature. In their 28 patients, 5 subjects demonstrated growth. They showed that none of the cysts decreased in size between successive MRIs.
When the TCs overcomes the high resistance of the sacrum bone and reaches the low-pressure cavity in the pelvis, the growth rate increases rapidly and can reach giant sizes. All the GTCs can grow fast because they are reported to have a free flow of CSF between the cyst body and subarachnoid space [5]. The question we cannot answer now that is under what circumstances an intrasacral cyst may extend into pelvic cavity. Three theories may be proposed to explain intrapelvic extension; first, there is a congenital bone and soft tissue defect in the anterior sacral outlet where the cyst can find a natural route to pelvic cavity as in giant sacral anterior meningocele [11, 12]. Second, TCs have been associated with connective tissue disorders [13] but our patient did not have a diagnosis of connective tissue disorder. The third, the pressure within the cyst is high enough to enlarge the foramen in the anterior sacrum and the cyst can create a route to pelvic cavity. This theory is supported by publications of Urquiaga et al. and Puffer et al. [14, 15] in which they reported cases of TC causing significant progressive bone erosion in the sacrum, leading to an insufficiency fracture and instability, which required lumbosacropelvic stabilization.
GTCs usually cause back pain, radiating pain due to nerve root irritation, numbness, abdominal pain, increasing abdominal girth, and stress urinary incontinence secondary to bladder compression from the cyst. Although Ishii et al. reported that changes in posture did not alter the patient’s symptoms, Yang et al. [5, 9, 10] proposed that complaints increase in situations where pelvic pressure increases and decrease when in a lying position. In our case symptoms were aggravated with increased pelvic pressure. We also believe that in intrasacral TCs the symptoms are due to compression of the sacral nerves, whereas in GTCs nerve stretching can also cause these symptoms.
One of the most important questions is when to operate on a symptom-free GTC patient. And is it important to size of the cyst when we make decision for operation? TCs usually grow over years, largely limited to bone and most are asymptomatic [9, 10]. Yang et al. [10] demonstrated that growth of lumbosacral perineural (Tarlov) cysts and their natural history. In their study, there was no association detected between worsening of symptoms and cyst growth. There is no consensus on the indication, timing and size of TC in the surgical treatment of TCs. Voyadzis et al. [16] recommended surgery for large sacral TCs (> 1.5 cm) with the presence of associated radicular symptoms. Burke et al. [17] recommended surgery for delayed contrast "filling of the cysts was identifed on computed tomographic myelography. Nulen et al. [18] recommended surgery for younger age, a single TC, and shorter duration of symptoms. The surgical decision does not directly correlate with the size of the cyst, but symptoms.
GTCs should differ from intrasacral TCs in surgical decision-making. In the present study, we showed for the first time that, when the cyst size gets bigger, its intrapelvic annual growing rate is getting faster. GTCs encounter minimal resistance in the intrapelvic distance comparing to sacral bone and therefore their growth increases rapidly in years. Therefore, surgical decision for GTCs can be made according to the size of the cyst. If cyst has wide intrapelvic extension, the operation should be considered, even if the patient is asymptomatic. Early surgery may reduce peroperative complications and postoperative headache. Acute CSF loss during GTC excision can reach up to 1000 ml. and sudden onset, progressive, severe headache can be seen [19]. Akahori et al. [20] reported spontaneous rupture of a huge presacral TC and resultant neurologic improvement in a case of symptomatic presacral TCs. Although this patient resulted in recovery, one should try to prevent spontaneous rupture.
Conclusion
GTCs extending into the pelvis are quite rare compared to common TCs located into bony of sacrum. Additionally, their symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, and management processes are different from intrasacral TCs. We showed for the first time that presented GTC grows in both directions over time with overall annual growth rates, 7.671% for RGR_SD and 6.237% for RGR_SC. Eventually, the cyst grows 2,1 times in the craniocaudal and 2,5 times in the diagonal axis over 12 years. When the time-size correlation is observed, it becomes evident that the cyst growing speed increases over the years because of minimal resistance in the intrapelvic cavity. Early surgery may be considered to prevent rapid growth in the intrapelvic cavity and to reduce possible complications of the giant cyst.
References
Tarlov IM (1938) Perineural cysts of the spinal nerve roots. Arch Neural Psychiatry 40:1067–1074
Nabors MW, Pait TG, Byrd EB, Karim NO, Davis DO, Kobrine AI, Rizzoli HV (1988) Updated assessment and current classification of spinal meningeal cysts. J Neurosurg 68(3):366–377. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1988.68.3.0366
Berlin E, Khan S, Sullivan W, Schneider B, Walker J (2022) Giant tarlov cyst and the importance of advanced imaging before interventional spine injections. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 101(3):e46–e47. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000001849
Prashad B, Jain AK, Dhammi IK (2007) Tarlov cyst: case report and review of literature. Indian J Orthop 41(4):401–403. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.37007
Ishii K, Yuzurihara M, Asamoto S, Doi H, Kubota M (2007) A huge presacral Tarlov cyst Case report. J Neurosurg Spine 7(2):259–263. https://doi.org/10.3171/SPI-07/08/259
Zhu H, Shen L, Chen Z, Yang M, Zheng X (2020) Giant tarlov cysts with rare pelvic extension: report of 3 cases and literature review. World Neurosurg 139:505–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.04.112
Sato K, Nagata K, Sugita Y (2002) Spinal extradural meningeal cyst: correct radiological and histopathological diagnosis. Neurosurg Focus. https://doi.org/10.3171/foc.2002.13.4.8
Hoffmann WA, Poorter H (2002) Avoiding bias in calculations of relative growth rate. Ann Bot 90(1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcf140
Yang AI, McShane BJ, Welch WC (2018) Growth of a sacral perineural (tarlov) cyst: clinical Images. World Neurosurg 119:400–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.279
Yang AI, Rinehart CD, McShane BJ, Hitti FL, Welch WC (2020) Growth of lumbosacral perineural (tarlov) cysts: a natural history analysis. Neurosurgery 86(1):88–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy586
Lemire RJ (1988) Neural tube defects. JAMA 259(4):558–562
Massimi L, Calisti A, Koutzoglou M, Di Rocco C (2003) Giant anterior sacral meningocele and posterior sagittal approach. Childs Nerv Syst 19(10–11):722–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-003-0814-1
Paterakis K, Brotis A, Bakopoulou M, Rountas C, Dardiotis E, Hadjigeorgiou GM, Fountas KN, Karantanas A (2019) A giant tarlov cyst presenting with hydronephrosis in a patient with marfan syndrome: a case report and review of the literature. World Neurosurg 126:581–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.02.222
Puffer RC, Gates MJ, Copeland W 3rd, Krauss WE, Fogelson J (2017) Tarlov cyst causing sacral insufficiency fracture. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 13(3):E4–E7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opw025
Urquiaga JF, Bagdady K, Zhang JK, Mercier PJ, Mattei TA (2023) Complex surgical reconstruction for spinopelvic instability caused by a giant tarlov cyst eroding the sacrum: a case report. N Am Spine Soc J 14:100212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100212
Voyadzis JM, Bhargava P, Henderson FC (2001) Tarlov cysts: a study of 10 cases with review of the literature. J Neurosurg 95(1):25–32. https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2001.95.1.0025
Burke JF, Thawani JP, Berger I, Nayak NR, Stephen JH, Farkas T, Aschyan HJ, Pierce J, Kanchwala S, Long DM, Welch WC (2016) Microsurgical treatment of sacral perineural (Tarlov) cysts: case series and review of the literature. J Neurosurg Spine 24(5):700–707. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.9.SPINE153
Neulen A, Kantelhardt SR, Pilgram-Pastor SM, Metz I, Rohde V, Giese A (2011) Microsurgical fenestration of perineural cysts to the thecal sac at the level of the distal dural sleeve. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 153(7):1427–1434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-011-1043-0
Kadian S, Mallikarjuna S, Chandra V, Agrawal S (2022) Post-operative low cerebrospinal fluid pressure headache in giant tarlov cysts. Cureus 14(7):e27045. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.27045
Akahori S, Nishimura Y, Eguchi K, Nagashima Y, Ando R, Awaya T, Hara M, Natsume A (2021) Spontaneous rupture of a huge presacral tarlov cyst leading to dramatic neurologic recovery. World Neurosurg 145:306–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.09.098
Funding
Open access funding provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kaptanoğlu, E., Malçok, Ü.A., Kaptanoğlu, D. et al. Growth rate of a giant Tarlov (perineural) cyst with intrapelvic extension. Eur Spine J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08415-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08415-2