{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0187207488299532, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0046801872074883, 'mean_word_length': 5.168269230769231, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Giant Cavernomas: Gigantic Propositions for a Lilliputian Problem?

Aim
The aim of this case series is to report two cases of giant cavernomas treated at a tertiary level centre along with a literature review on the differences between giant cavernomas and normal sized cavernomas.


Method
The first case was that of a 13-year-old male with habitual seizures since one year of age with normal examination findings. His imaging revealed a large parieto-occipital lesion which was excised microsurgically after a parieto-occipital craniotomy and a transcortical approach. The second case was a 26-year-old male who presented with generalised seizures and bilateral visual loss. Imaging was suggestive of a large left lateral ventricular lesion. A left fronto-temporo-parietal craniotomy was done followed by transventricular microsurgical excision. Histopathology of both cases were reported to be cavernomas. The first patient had transient hemiparesis post-operatively which improved within 24 hours. Eventually, both patients had an uneventful follow-up.


Conclusion
Microsurgical excision remains the treatment of choice for giant cavernomas. In toto excision may be advocated depending upon the location of the cavernoma especially with respect to eloquence and venous anatomy.