Progressive Double Arcuate Scotoma is a Rare Presentation in Falx Meningioma Cerebri

Zainal Abidin Mohd-Khairy, Wan Hitam Wan-Hazabbah

Abstract


A 77-year-old woman with multiple comorbidities, who is a glaucoma suspect, presented with a progression of a double arcuate visual filed defect over a five-month period. The intraocular pressure was within normal limit, and the cup-to-disc ratio was between 0.6 to 0.7 in both eyes. A computed tomography (CT) scan of the brain revealed a large, well-circumsribed hyperdense mass in the right occipital lobe, with heterogenous enhancement post-contrast and obliteration of the third ventricle. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a well-defined, extra-axial, rounded mass in the right parieto-occipital region, with a cerebrospinal fluid cleft, a dural tail sign and broad base consistent with a right parieto-occipital falx meningioma. The patient was advised to undergo surgical removal of the mass; however, she declined due to her advanced age and the absence of neurological abnormalities, except for the visual field defect. In conclusion, a high index of suspicion is warranted in patients who are glaucoma suspects and present with progressive visual field defects. A progressive double arcuate visual field defect may indicate an underlying silent occipital pathology.

Keywords


falx meningioma; glaucoma suspect; visual field defect; arcuate scotoma

Full Text:

PDF

References


References

Chung SB, Kim CY, Park CK, Kim DG, Jung HW. Falx meningiomas: surgical results and lessons learned from 68 cases. J Korean Neurosurgical Soc. 2007:42(4):276-280. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2007.42.4.276.

Kedar S, Ghate D, Corbet JJ. Visual field in neuro-ophthalmology. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2011:59(2), 103-109. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.77013.

Ostrom QT, Cioffi G, Gittleman H, Patil N, Waite K, Kruchko C, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2012–2016. Neuro Oncol. 2019;21(Suppl 5):v1-v100. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noz150.

Watts J, Box G, Galvin A, Brotchie P, Trost N, Sutherland T. Magnetic resonance imaging of meningiomas: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging. 2014;5(1):113–122. doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0302-4.

Buetow MP, Buetow PC, Smirniotopoulos JG. Typical, atypical, and misleading features in meningioma. Radiographics. 1991;11(6):1087–1106. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.11.6.1749851.

Heiss WD, Raab P, Lanfermann H. Multimodality assessment of brain tumors and tumor recurrence. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(10): 1585-1600. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.110.084210.

Goldbrunner R, Minniti G, Preusser M, Jenkinson MD, Sallabanda K, Houdart E, et al. EANO guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of meningiomas. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(9): e383-9. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30321-7.

Maggio I, Franceschi E, Tosoni A, Nunno VD, Gatto L, Lodi R, Brandes AA. Meningioma: not always a benign tumor. A review of advances in the treatment of meningiomas. CNS Oncol. 2021;10(2):CNS72. doi: 10.2217/cns-2021-0003.

Karsy M, Guan J, Cohen A, Colman H, Jensen RL. Medical management of meningiomas: current status, failed treatments, and promising horizons. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2016;27(2): 249-260. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2015.11.002.




Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences (JBCS)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 

Flag Counter           

                     

                                              Copyright © 2016 AMDI Publisher, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Disclaimer : This website has been updated to the best of our knowledge to be accurate. However, Universiti Sains Malaysia shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this web site.
                                            Best viewed: Mozilla Firefox 4.0 & Google Chrome at 1024 × 768 resolution.