XXXX : two case reports and analysis of the literature.

@entity1 @entity3439 @entity16 @entity4905 @entity1410 @entity6477 @entity10
@entity3439 ( @entity3439 ) had been considered extremely rare until identification with imaging studies. Its natural history is still quite unknown in terms of potential origin and course. As a consequence of various controversies, there is still no clearly established treatment, particularly in regard to medical or surgical management. The best decision requires tailoring treatment to the individual @entity1 according to his or her clinical condition. Two @entity1 with @entity6477 are reported, the controversial management of this rare entity is analysed. In reviewing current published cases of @entity3439 , it seems that the outcome of an individual @entity1 is not related to the therapeutic approach, but to the level of consciousness and the @entity16 on admission. Surgical and medical treatment indications are taken into account for management. A @entity1 with @entity3439 developed an extension of the @entity1410 to the convexity at 2 weeks of his clinical course, with a decline of his @entity16 . The @entity1410 was then evacuated through a parietal craniotomy with an uneventful postoperative course. Another case of @entity3439 presented as @entity10 and @entity4905 , with spontaneous clinical improvement at 12 hours and with no decline in the @entity1 's @entity16 . Management was conservative. In both cases the neurological examination was normal after 6 months. As in previously reported cases, the clinical and @entity16 of the @entity1 on admission is crucial for the course of an @entity3439 . Treatment strategies are based on the individual neurological response of each case and the risk-benefit ratio to decide on a medical or surgical approach.
