Most importantly, osteoclast dysfunction mediates the pathogenesis of this disease.Osteopetrosis is caused by underlying mutations that interfere with the acidification of the osteoclast resorption pit, for example due to a deficiency of the carbonic anhydrase enzyme encoded by the CA2 gene. Carbonic anhydrase is required by osteoclasts for proton production. Without this enzyme hydrogen ion pumping is inhibited and bone resorption by osteoclasts is defective, as an acidic environment is needed to dissociate calcium hydroxyapatite from the bone matrix. As bone resorption fails while bone formation continues, excessive bone is formed.Mutations in at least nine genes cause the various types of osteopetrosis. Mutations in the CLCN7 gene are responsible for about 75 percent of cases of autosomal dominant osteopetrosis, 10 to 15 percent of cases of autosomal recessive osteopetrosis, and all known cases of intermediate autosomal osteopetrosis. TCIRG1 gene mutations cause about 50 percent of cases of autosomal recessive osteopetrosis. Mutations in other genes are less common causes of autosomal dominant and autosomal recessive forms of the disorder. The X-linked type of osteopetrosis, OL-EDA-ID, results from mutations in the IKBKG gene. In about 30 percent of all cases of osteopetrosis, the cause of the condition is unknown.The genes associated with osteopetrosis are involved in the formation, development, and function of specialized cells called osteoclasts. These cells break down bone tissue during bone remodeling, a normal process in which old bone is removed and new bone is created to replace it.
In this type, the hypoplasia of the cerebellar vermis does not reach past the horizontal midline of the fourth ventricle, and the posterior fossa is also not as large. The authors noted that this form would previously have been classified as simply mega–cisterna magna. In 1999, Calabró et al. first used the phrase Dandy–Walker continuum when referring to proposals that a condition known as Blakes pouch cyst falls under the umbrella of the Dandy–Walker complex proposed by Barkovich. Later authors would put these terms and systems under intense scrutiny and state that they added considerable confusion to the diagnosis of DWM. However, they remain commonly used.In 2011, Spennato et al. came up with a set of criteria based on Klein et al. (2003) that they considered necessary for diagnosis of DWM:
The lower portion of the cerebellar vermis is absent to varying degrees (three quarters, one half or one quarter missing). The posterior fossa (the space behind the cerebellum) is enlarged, and its cerebrospinal fluid flow is continuous with that of the fourth ventricle. The rest of the cerebellar vermis is hypoplastic and is pushed upwards and rotated forwards due to the enlarged posterior fossa. The cerebellar hemispheres are pushed forwards and to the side by the enlarged posterior fossa. The angle at the centre of the cerebellar vermis (representing the location of the fastigial nucleus) is large, giving a flattened appearance to the bottom of the vermis, or the fastigial nucleus is absent entirely.