Cargando…

Treatment of lumbar and intrathoracic meningocele: bioethical implications

Myelomeningocele is a congenital malformation caused by a developmental defect of the spinal cord structures. The exact cause is unknown, but different factors have been involved including radiation, malnutrition, drugs. Myelomeningocele can develop at any point in the spine, but the lumbosacral reg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tornali, Cristina, Praticò, Andrea D., Vecchio, Flavio, Polizzi, Agata, Ruggieri, Martino, Vecchio, Ignazio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mattioli 1885 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8343732/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34212901
http://dx.doi.org/10.23750/abm.v92i3.11600
Descripción
Sumario:Myelomeningocele is a congenital malformation caused by a developmental defect of the spinal cord structures. The exact cause is unknown, but different factors have been involved including radiation, malnutrition, drugs. Myelomeningocele can develop at any point in the spine, but the lumbosacral region is affected in over 75% of cases. Chest X-rays and computed tomography study are mandatory to reveal tracheal malformations or associated anomalies of the ribs. Treatment of myelomeningocele must be multidisciplinary and involve at the same time neurologists, radiologists, neurosurgeons, thoracic surgeons, bioethical experts and take care of the child and also of the family. Some experiences concern the possibility of a in-utero correction of myelomeningocele, in order to avoiding serious and progressive damages to the nervous system. Given the improvement of myelomeningocele management, the quality of life is nowadays more acceptable than in the past; however, some severe forms of myelomeningocele cannot still be corrected: in this cases, a “non-interventional” approach may require a form of passive euthanasia that should be discussed and approved with and by parents and Any dissent of the parents must be respected and considered reasonable. The choice of a “non-intervention”, which should be guaranteed to all the people capable of self-determination, is not however so immediate and direct in the case of the minor: the dissent expressed on his behalf by the parents or legal representative may be ethically difficult to be accepted. In this case, the best interest of the child must prevail as the goal of any therapeutic choice. (www.actabiomedica.it)