Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Rare and Inherited Diseases›Meningocele
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Meningocele

Rare and Inherited Diseases · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-29 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 4 min read

A congenital or acquired protrusion of the meninges, unaccompanied by neural tissue, through a bony defect in the skull or vertebral column.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (860 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

A congenital or acquired protrusion of the meninges, unaccompanied by neural tissue, through a bony defect in the skull or vertebral column.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Meningoceles; Herniation of Meninges; Meninges Herniation; Meninges Herniations; Meningeal Herniation; Herniation, Meningeal; Herniations, Meningeal; Meningeal Herniations.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Neural Tube Defects; Hernia

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 2,916 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Meningocele” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 219 of them (7.5%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 1,690 records.

Reviews account for 242 records (8.3%) and meta-analyses for 3. Randomized controlled trials number 2 (0.1%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 1,690 records; 2000-2009: 480 records; 2010-2019: 527 records; 2020 onward: 219 records1,690through 19994802000-20095272010-20192192020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19991,690
2000-2009480
2010-2019527
2020 onward219
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 8.3 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.1 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 0.1 percentReviews8.3% (242)Meta-analyses0.1% (3)Randomized controlled trials0.1% (2)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 2,916 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews2428.3%
Meta-analyses30.1%
Randomized controlled trials20.1%

Method: PubMed query "Meningocele"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.

Reading the evidence in rare and inherited diseases

Rare conditions are difficult to study: few patients means small studies, case reports and registries are common, and randomized trials are the exception. Small samples limit precision and can exaggerate effects, and cases reported in the literature may be the most severe or unusual. Evidence from many small studies is best read together. Check how patients were identified, how many were included and how long they were followed.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Management of giant pseudomeningoceles after spinal surgery
Weng YJ, Cheng CC, Li YY, Huang TJ, Hsu RW
2010Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
63cc by
PMID 20302667 · DOI · PMC2848136
Meningeal defects alter the tangential migration of cortical interneurons in Foxc1hith/hith mice
Zarbalis K, Choe Y, Siegenthaler JA, Orosco LA, Pleasure SJ
2012Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
47cc by
PMID 22248045 · DOI · PMC3287125
Sacral agenesis: a pilot whole exome sequencing and copy number study
Porsch RM, Merello E, De Marco P, Cheng G, Rodriguez L, So M, et al.
2016Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
13cc by
PMID 28007035 · DOI · PMC5178083
Congenital/primary clival meningocele: A systematic review and surgical approach based on a new proposed classification
Ferreira-Pinto PHC, Baroni Coelho de Oliveira Ferreira D, Lannes Simões E, Corrêa E, Gomes Lopes O, Rodrigues da Fonseca Passos MA, et al.
2026Systematic review
Design not recorded in structured metadata
0cc by
PMID 42566054 · DOI · PMC13451235

Management of giant pseudomeningoceles after spinal surgery [1]

Research article Weng YJ, Cheng CC, Li YY, Huang TJ, Hsu RW · · 2010 · cited 63 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundPseudomeningoceles are a rare complication after spinal surgery, and studies on these complex formations are few.
Closing excerpt
ConclusionsWe conclude that a combined treatment protocol involving open revision surgery for extirpation of pseudomeningoceles, repair of dural tears, and implantation of a subarachnoid catheter for drainage is safe and effective to treat giant pseudomeningoceles.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (168 words)

BackgroundPseudomeningoceles are a rare complication after spinal surgery, and studies on these complex formations are few.MethodsBetween October 2000 and March 2008, 11 patients who developed symptomatic pseudomeningoceles after spinal surgery were recruited. In this retrospective study, we reported our experiences in the management of these complex, symptomatic pseudomeningoceles after spinal surgery. A giant pseudomeningocele was defined as a pseudomeningocele >8 cm in length. We also evaluated the risk factors for the formation of giant pseudomeningoceles.ResultsAll patients were treated successfully with a combined treatment protocol of open revision surgery for extirpation of the pseudomeningoceles, repair of dural tears, and implantation of a subarachnoid catheter for drainage. Surgery-related complications were not observed. Recurrence of pseudomeningocele was not observed for any patient at a mean follow-up of 16.5 months. This result was confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging.ConclusionsWe conclude that a combined treatment protocol involving open revision surgery for extirpation of pseudomeningoceles, repair of dural tears, and implantation of a subarachnoid catheter for drainage is safe and effective to treat giant pseudomeningoceles.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 20302667 · DOI · PMC2848136

Meningeal defects alter the tangential migration of cortical interneurons in Foxc1hith/hith mice [2]

Research article Zarbalis K, Choe Y, Siegenthaler JA, Orosco LA, Pleasure SJ · · 2012 · cited 47 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundTangential migration presents the primary mode of migration of cortical interneurons translocating into the cerebral cortex from subpallial domains.
Closing excerpt
ConclusionsOur results suggest a critical role for the forebrain meninges to promote during development the tangential migration of cortical interneurons along the cortical marginal zone and Cxcl12 as the factor responsible for this property.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (249 words)

BackgroundTangential migration presents the primary mode of migration of cortical interneurons translocating into the cerebral cortex from subpallial domains. This migration takes place in multiple streams with the most superficial one located in the cortical marginal zone. While a number of forebrain-expressed molecules regulating this process have emerged, it remains unclear to what extent structures outside the brain, like the forebrain meninges, are involved.ResultsWe studied a unique Foxc1 hypomorph mouse model (Foxc1hith/hith) with meningeal defects and impaired tangential migration of cortical interneurons. We identified a territorial correlation between meningeal defects and disruption of interneuron migration along the adjacent marginal zone in these animals, suggesting that impaired meningeal integrity might be the primary cause for the observed migration defects. Moreover, we postulate that the meningeal factor regulating tangential migration that is affected in homozygote mutants is the chemokine Cxcl12. In addition, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis, we provide evidence that the Cxcl12 gene is a direct transcriptional target of Foxc1 in the meninges. Further, we observe migration defects of a lesser degree in Cajal-Retzius cells migrating within the cortical marginal zone, indicating a less important role for Cxcl12 in their migration. Finally, the developmental migration defects observed in Foxc1hith/hith mutants do not lead to obvious differences in interneuron distribution in the adult if compared to control animals.ConclusionsOur results suggest a critical role for the forebrain meninges to promote during development the tangential migration of cortical interneurons along the cortical marginal zone and Cxcl12 as the factor responsible for this property.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 22248045 · DOI · PMC3287125

Sacral agenesis: a pilot whole exome sequencing and copy number study [3]

Research article Porsch RM, Merello E, De Marco P, Cheng G, Rodriguez L, So M, et al. · · 2016 · cited 13 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundCaudal regression syndrome (CRS) or sacral agenesis is a rare congenital disorder characterized by a constellation of congenital caudal anomalies affecting the caudal spine and spinal cord, the hindgut, the urogenital system, and the lower limbs.
Closing excerpt
ConclusionDespite the genetic diversity and the complexity of the phenotype, this pilot study identified genetic features common across CRS patients.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (218 words)

BackgroundCaudal regression syndrome (CRS) or sacral agenesis is a rare congenital disorder characterized by a constellation of congenital caudal anomalies affecting the caudal spine and spinal cord, the hindgut, the urogenital system, and the lower limbs. CRS is a complex condition, attributed to an abnormal development of the caudal mesoderm, likely caused by the effect of interacting genetic and environmental factors. A well-known risk factor is maternal type 1 diabetes.MethodWhole exome sequencing and copy number variation (CNV) analyses were conducted on 4 Caucasian trios to identify de novo and inherited rare mutations.ResultsIn this pilot study, exome sequencing and copy number variation (CNV) analyses implicate a number of candidate genes, including SPTBN5, MORN1, ZNF330, CLTCL1 and PDZD2. De novo mutations were found in SPTBN5, MORN1 and ZNF330 and inherited predicted damaging mutations in PDZD2 (homozygous) and CLTCL1 (compound heterozygous). Importantly, predicted damaging mutations in PTEN (heterozygous), in its direct regulator GLTSCR2 (compound heterozygous) and in VANGL1 (heterozygous) were identified. These genes had previously been linked with the CRS phenotype. Two CNV deletions, one de novo (chr3q13.13) and one homozygous (chr8p23.2), were detected in one of our CRS patients. These deletions overlapped with CNVs previously reported in patients with similar phenotype.ConclusionDespite the genetic diversity and the complexity of the phenotype, this pilot study identified genetic features common across CRS patients.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28007035 · DOI · PMC5178083

Congenital/primary clival meningocele: A systematic review and surgical approach based on a new proposed classification [4]

Systematic review Ferreira-Pinto PHC, Baroni Coelho de Oliveira Ferreira D, Lannes Simões E, Corrêa E, Gomes Lopes O, Rodrigues da Fonseca Passos MA, et al. · · 2026

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Skull base meningoceles are extremely rare, most commonly resulting from congenital defects in sphenoid bone fusion.
Closing excerpt
Anatomical dissection studies confirmed that the endonasal corridor is more suitable for the upper third of the clivus and the transoral route for the lower third.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (225 words)

Skull base meningoceles are extremely rare, most commonly resulting from congenital defects in sphenoid bone fusion. Inadequate embryonic fusion between the posterior sphenoid and the occipital bones may result in a transclival meningocele. Given the absence of a formal classification system for clival meningoceles and clear guidelines for the most appropriate endoscopic skull base surgical approach, we combined an anatomical study and a systematic review to characterize anatomical patterns, propose a preliminary classification, and discuss transoral and endonasal surgical corridors according to each clival subtype. In addition, we report the first known case of a primary clival meningocele successfully treated via a transoral endoscopic approach. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024575282) and received approval from the Ethics Committee (82878724.1.0000.5259). The systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were rigorously searched. Anatomical dissection of midsagittal skull base specimens was performed to assess surgical access to clival regions. Seventeen studies comprising 18 patients (mean age 30.7 years; 72.2% female) were included. Clival defects were classified as posterior transsphenoidal (n = 11), spheno-occipital (n = 1), and basioccipital (n = 6). The endoscopic endonasal approach appeared more appropriate for posterior transsphenoidal cases and the transoral route for basioccipital defects. Anatomical dissection studies confirmed that the endonasal corridor is more suitable for the upper third of the clivus and the transoral route for the lower third.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42566054 · DOI · PMC13451235

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Spontaneous CSF Leaks [5]
    Wang EW, Vandergrift WA, Schlosser RJ · Otolaryngol Clin North Am · 2011 · cited 94 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Endoscopic endonasal versus open repair of anterior skull base CSF leak, meningocele, and encephalocele: a systematic review of outcomes [6]
    Komotar RJ, Starke RM, Raper DM, Anand VK, Schwartz TH · J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg · 2013 · cited 87 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Review of spinal pseudomeningoceles and cerebrospinal fluid fistulas [7]
    Hawk MW, Kim KD · Neurosurg Focus · 2000 · cited 85 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Management of meningoencephalic herniation of the temporal bone: Personal experience and literature review [8]
    Sanna M, Fois P, Russo A, Falcioni M · Laryngoscope · 2009 · cited 82 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Cephaloceles and related malformations [9]
    Naidich TP, Altman NR, Braffman BH, McLone DG, Zimmerman RA · AJNR Am J Neuroradiol · 1992 · cited 79 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Currarino syndrome: proposal of a diagnostic and therapeutic protocol [10]
    Martucciello G, Torre M, Belloni E, Lerone M, Pini Prato A, Cama A, et al. · J Pediatr Surg · 2004 · cited 78 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Weng YJ, Cheng CC, Li YY, Huang TJ, Hsu RW. Management of giant pseudomeningoceles after spinal surgery. . 2010. PMID 20302667 · DOI · PMC2848136
  2. Zarbalis K, Choe Y, Siegenthaler JA, Orosco LA, Pleasure SJ. Meningeal defects alter the tangential migration of cortical interneurons in Foxc1hith/hith mice. . 2012. PMID 22248045 · DOI · PMC3287125
  3. Porsch RM, Merello E, De Marco P, Cheng G, Rodriguez L, So M, et al.. Sacral agenesis: a pilot whole exome sequencing and copy number study. . 2016. PMID 28007035 · DOI · PMC5178083
  4. Ferreira-Pinto PHC, Baroni Coelho de Oliveira Ferreira D, Lannes Simões E, Corrêa E, Gomes Lopes O, Rodrigues da Fonseca Passos MA, et al.. Congenital/primary clival meningocele: A systematic review and surgical approach based on a new proposed classification. . 2026. PMID 42566054 · DOI · PMC13451235
  5. Wang EW, Vandergrift WA, Schlosser RJ. Spontaneous CSF Leaks. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2011. PMID 21819875 · DOI
  6. Komotar RJ, Starke RM, Raper DM, Anand VK, Schwartz TH. Endoscopic endonasal versus open repair of anterior skull base CSF leak, meningocele, and encephalocele: a systematic review of outcomes. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2013. PMID 23027433 · DOI
  7. Hawk MW, Kim KD. Review of spinal pseudomeningoceles and cerebrospinal fluid fistulas. Neurosurg Focus. 2000. PMID 16859266 · DOI
  8. Sanna M, Fois P, Russo A, Falcioni M. Management of meningoencephalic herniation of the temporal bone: Personal experience and literature review. Laryngoscope. 2009. PMID 19479744 · DOI
  9. Naidich TP, Altman NR, Braffman BH, McLone DG, Zimmerman RA. Cephaloceles and related malformations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1992. PMID 1566723 · PMC8333224
  10. Martucciello G, Torre M, Belloni E, Lerone M, Pini Prato A, Cama A, et al.. Currarino syndrome: proposal of a diagnostic and therapeutic protocol. J Pediatr Surg. 2004. PMID 15359381 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-29.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • EncephaloceleRare and Inherited Diseases
  • AnencephalyRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Neural Tube DefectsRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Arachnoid CystsRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Charcot-Marie-Tooth DiseaseRare and Inherited Diseases
  • GastroschisisRare and Inherited Diseases

All 106 articles in Rare and Inherited Diseases →

At a glance

2,916
PubMed records on this heading
8%
published since 2020
242
review articles
2
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-29; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • EncephaloceleRare and Inherited Diseases
  • AnencephalyRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Neural Tube DefectsRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Arachnoid CystsRare and Inherited Diseases
  • Charcot-Marie-Tooth DiseaseRare and Inherited Diseases

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support