Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleInterventional

Endovascular Treatment for Low-Grade (Spetzler-Martin I–II) Brain Arteriovenous Malformations

H. Baharvahdat, R. Blanc, R. Fahed, S. Smajda, G. Ciccio, J.-P. Desilles, H. Redjem, S. Escalard, M. Mazighi, D. Chauvet, T. Robert, P. Sasannejad and M. Piotin
American Journal of Neuroradiology April 2019, 40 (4) 668-672; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5988
H. Baharvahdat
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for H. Baharvahdat
R. Blanc
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R. Blanc
R. Fahed
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R. Fahed
S. Smajda
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S. Smajda
G. Ciccio
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for G. Ciccio
J.-P. Desilles
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for J.-P. Desilles
H. Redjem
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for H. Redjem
S. Escalard
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S. Escalard
M. Mazighi
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Mazighi
D. Chauvet
bNeurosurgical Department (D.C.), Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for D. Chauvet
T. Robert
cNeurosurgical Department (T.R.), Ente-Ospedaliero-Cantonale Ospedale Civico di Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for T. Robert
P. Sasannejad
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for P. Sasannejad
M. Piotin
aFrom the Department of Interventional Neuroradiology (H.B., R.B., R.F., S.S., G.C., J.-P.D, H.R., S.E., M.M., P.S., M.P.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Piotin
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Surgical resection is usually considered as the first-line curative strategy for low-grade (Spetzler-Martin grade I–II) brain arteriovenous malformations because it has a high cure rate and low complications. The role of endovascular treatment remains to be clarified in this indication, especially after A Randomized Trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations. Our objective was to assess the safety and efficacy of first-line endovascular treatment in low-grade brain arteriovenous malformation management at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with low-grade brain arteriovenous malformations treated primarily with embolization in our department between January 2005 and December 2015 were retrieved from our prospectively collected registry. The primary outcome was the brain arteriovenous malformation obliteration rate, and secondary outcomes were disability or death secondary to brain arteriovenous malformation embolization assessed through modification of the modified Rankin Scale.

RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four patients completed endovascular treatment during the study period and represent our study population. Complete exclusion of brain arteriovenous malformations was achieved in 205 patients (92%), including 62.1% of brain arteriovenous malformation exclusions after a single endovascular treatment session. One patient died of a hemorrhagic complication after endovascular treatment, leading to a mortality rate of 0.4%. Twelve patients (5%) kept a permanent neurologic deficit secondary to a complication of the endovascular treatment. An overall good outcome (mRS 0–2) was reported in 179 patients (80%).

CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment might be a suitable alternative to surgical resection for complete exclusion of selected low-grade brain arteriovenous malformations.

ABBREVIATIONS:

BAVM
brain arteriovenous malformation
EVT
endovascular treatment

Surgery is considered the first-line treatment for low-grade (Spetzler-Martin grades I and II) brain arteriovenous malformations (BAVMs), with high cure rates (94%–100%) and low complications (0%–6%).1 After the publication of A Randomized Trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (ARUBA) results in favor of medical conservative management,2 multiple criticisms emerged.3 Notably, some authors suggested that the 3-fold increase in death or stroke in the interventional group was at least partially due to the low rate of patients treated surgically and the preferable use of endovascular treatment (EVT). In ARUBA, low-grade BAVMs4 were also poorly represented (13%). To assess the safety and efficacy of EVT of low-grade BAVMs, we reviewed our experience with low-grade cerebral BAVM management at Rothschild Foundation, Paris, where embolization is the first-line therapy.

Materials and Methods

Baseline Characteristics of Patients and BAVMs

From our prospectively collected data base, we retrieved low-grade BAVMs treated by an endovascular approach in our Interventional Neuroradiology Department between January 2005 and December 2015. Patients with low-grade BAVMs who completed all treatment procedures were enrolled in the study. We excluded the patients who had ongoing treatment or were lost during follow-up. Baseline clinical characteristics of patients were reviewed. Clinical status was assessed according to the modified Rankin Scale at the initial and follow-up visits. Cross-sectional imaging and angiograms were reviewed for precise BAVM location, size, and angioarchitecture and classification according to the Spetzler-Martin grade. BAVMs were classified as cortical, deep, or infratentorial. The anatomic grading was established by 2 senior operators independent of the endovascular treatments.

The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee. According to the French regulations, the board waived the need for signed consent for patients included in the study.

Endovascular Procedures

Patients were allocated to treatment after multidisciplinary discussions involving interventional neuroradiologists (with a neurosurgical or a radiologic background) and at least 1 vascular neurosurgeon. During the investigation, EVT was the first choice for low-grade BAVMs with a curative goal (ie, complete obliteration of the nidus by an endovascular approach in 1 single session whenever possible).

EVTs were performed with the patient under general anesthesia. In the study period, Onyx (Covidien, Irvine, California) was the most commonly used agent for embolization of AVMs. Occasionally, n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (Histoacryl; Braun, Melsungen, Germany) or Glubran 2 (GEM, Viareggio, Italy) was injected during the procedure for high-flow fistulas. Only a transarterial approach was used. The procedure was stopped when complete occlusion was achieved or when there was a 2-cm reflux of Onyx in the nondetachable microcatheter or Onyx reflux to the proximal end of the detachable part in the detachable microcatheter. If necessary, multiple pedicles were embolized in 1 session to achieve the desired occlusion of the AVM. A head CT scan was performed in the operating room after each procedure or immediately if any perforation occurred. After the procedure, all patients were admitted to the intensive care unit with control of systolic blood pressure for 24–48 hours and were discharged within 4–5 days if there was no complication. Cerebral MR imaging was performed before and after the procedure for all patients. In case of multiple sessions, the interval between the 2 procedures was 1–4 months. Pre- and postprocedural complications were prospectively collected.

Angiographic and Clinical Outcome

All patients treated in our center systematically underwent a 6-month follow-up DSA after the last treatment session: BAVM occlusion, defined by a complete nidus occlusion with no residual arteriovenous shunt and no early venous filling, was assessed by an interventional neuroradiologist who was independent of the operators who performed the treatment.

Clinical assessment of the patient was performed by neurologists from the same center who were independent of the operators performing the endovascular treatments. Imaging evaluation was also performed by independent interventional neuroradiologists. Any new neurologic deficit was collected and considered as transient if it resolved within 1 month after endovascular treatment or as permanent if it remained for >1 month. The outcomes were classified as poor for mRS 3–6 and as good for mRS 0–2.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous data are presented as means ± SDs, and categorical data, as count and percentage. Statistical comparisons were performed by a Student t test for normally distributed data, the Mann-Whitney U test for data with a skewed distribution, and the χ2 and Fisher exact tests for the categorical data. To assess the risk factors of poor outcome (mRS > 2), we performed univariate analysis using baseline characteristics of the patients, AVM angioarchitecture, and endovascular procedure variables. Multivariate analysis was performed to define independent predictive variables of poor outcome using binary logistic regression. A P value < .05 was statistically significant. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 16.0; IBM, Armonk, New York).

By increasing the time of the study and the number of patients, we attempted to reduce the bias effects related to the structural design of the study. Data, analytic methods, and study materials will be made available to any researcher for reproducing the results or replicating the procedure. Requests to receive these materials should be sent to the corresponding author, who will maintain their availability.

Results

Basic Characteristics of Patients

From 2005 to 2015, a total of 330 patients with low-grade AVMs were managed in our hospital. Two hundred eighty-eight patients received EVT. Fifty-six patients who were still undergoing treatment during this period and 8 patients who were lost during follow-up were excluded from the study. These 8 patients did not experience any immediate complications after embolization. Two hundred twenty-four patients who completed EVT (ie, patients with AVM exclusion after EVT confirmed on 6-month follow-up angiography or patients with a remnant AVM but no residual access that would allow pursuing EVT) were included in the present study (baseline characteristics available in Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Baseline characteristics and results of endovascular treatmenta

Treatment Outcome

The mean duration of angiographic follow-up after treatment was 9.7 ± 11.9 months. Complete exclusion of BAVMs was achieved in 205 patients (92%). From 224 patients, 139 patients (62.1%) were cured with a single endovascular procedure; 51 (22.8%), with 2 procedures; 26 (11.6%), with 3 procedures; and 8 (3.6%), with >3 procedures. In 19 patients with incomplete AVM exclusion after EVT, treatment was completed with an operation in 8 patients (3.6%) and radiosurgery in 9 patients (4%). The 2 remaining patients underwent no further treatment. The complete exclusion rate did not differ among the cortical and subcortical BAVMs, deeply located BAVMs, or infratentorially located BAVMs (Table 2). Delayed hemorrhagic complications after EVT were encountered in 11 patients (5%), and severe ischemic complication occurred in 5 patients (2%). Thirty-two patients (14%) developed a new neurologic deficit: Twenty patients (9%) improved completely within 30 days of the operation, and 12 patients (5%) kept a permanent deficit (7 patients [3%] from hemorrhagic complications and 5 patients [2%] from ischemic complications). An overall good outcome (mRS 0–2) was reported in 179 patients (80%). Thirteen patients (6%) had a worse mRS score compared with their preoperative status, including 9 patients (69%) with a hemorrhagic presentation. The mortality rate was 0.4%.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Cure rate according to location of AVMa

Predictive Variables of Clinical Outcome

Univariate analysis showed that factors associated with poor outcome were hemorrhagic history (P = .000), preoperative condition (mRS 0–1 versus mRS 2–5) (P = .000), eloquent location of the AVM (P = .008), and infratentorial location of the AVM (P = .010). In contrast, no association was found with age, sex, Spetzler-Martin grade, lateralization of the AVM, presence of deep drainage, presence of an intranidal aneurysm, number of procedures, volume of Onyx, use of n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate, and the number of embolized pedicles.

A multivariate analysis was performed, including the 4 factors associated with poor outcome in univariate analysis, which were entered into the model. In this analysis, only the preoperative condition (poor preoperative mRS score) was associated with poor outcome (OR = 0.029, P = .000). The hemorrhagic history of the AVM, eloquent location of the AVM, infratentorial location of the AVM, and supplementary grade ≤3 were not found to be predictive factors of poor outcome.

Discussion

This study represents the results of endovascular management as the first-line treatment approach for low-grade BAVMs in a single high-volume center: Ninety-two percent of BAVMs were completely obliterated by an endovascular approach alone (62.1% of those in 1 single EVT session), with a permanent neurologic deficit of 5% and a 0.4% mortality rate. According to their size, low-grade BAVMs were reported to be suitable for complete exclusion by only a single session.5⇓⇓–8 The development of new tools allows supraselective catheterization of the nidus with prolonged embolization resulting in better exclusion of the nidus and draining veins.9,10

The deeply located, the infratentorial, and eloquently located BAVMs were reported to be associated with higher rates of treatment failure and complications.7 Nevertheless, in our experience, the cure rate in those locations is as high as that in the cortical location with a similar complication rate.

The treatment of unruptured BAVMs remains controversial, even more so since the publication of the ARUBA trial2 and the Scottish Intracranial Vascular Malformation Study.11 Nevertheless, our study shows encouraging results of EVT for low-grade unruptured BAVMs, with 88% complete exclusion and 6% poor outcome, which need to be confirmed in randomized trials with a comparative group undergoing conservative management.

In the literature search we performed, overall cure rates of AVM EVT ranged from 23.5% to 94%.1,7,12⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–20 When low-grade AVMs were extracted from the studies, the cure rate was about 93%. In a review of 439 low-grade AVMs treated solely by EVT, the complication rate was about 4.1% and the mortality was about 0.5% (Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3:

Summary of endovascular treatment for low-grade brain arteriovenous malformationsa

Surgery is considered the standard and first-choice treatment for low-grade AVMs, with a mean cure rate of 98% (94%–100%), mean complications of 2.2% (0%–6%), and mortality rate of 0%–2%.1,4,21⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–28 However, the deep and eloquently located AVMs can be inaccessible or at high risk for surgery.2,24,29,30 Although 8%–45% of low-grade AVMs benefit from preoperative embolization that results in easier AVM surgery with fewer complications,2,23,24,31 only 7.5% of our patients required surgery or radiosurgery for completing exclusion of the AVM. Cosmetic problems are another issue for brain surgery, which is not the case in endovascular treatments.

The eloquently located AVMs are associated with a higher risk of neurologic complications (4%–10%).1,23,24,32 Use of functional MR imaging before an operation does not seem to reduce the neurologic complication rate following the operation.32 The complete resection of deeply located AVMs is less frequent with higher morbidity of 0%–13% and higher mortality of 0%–6%.27,30,31,33⇓⇓–36 The deeply located AVMs also benefit from preoperative embolization in up to 54% of cases, more than the superficial ones.31,35 The diffuse architecture of AVMs is also an important limitation for surgery.1 Supplementary grading, patient age, architecture of AVMs, and location of AVMs are shown to be important preoperative factors for correct stratification of patients for an operation to increase the rate of complete resection and reduce the risk of complications.1

Radiosurgery is considered an effective alternative approach to surgery for small AVMs, especially those located in deep or eloquent areas. Yet, the 2- to 3-year delayed response puts patients at risk of hemorrhage, particularly in ruptured cases, and it even seems not to be limited to 3 years but could be up to 8 years after AVM obliteration.37,38 The cure rate of radiosurgery is about 70%–93% for low-grade AVMs, with permanent symptomatic complications of 3%–12%, rebleeding of 1.7%–10%, and mortality of 0%–3%.1,39⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–46 In a recent multicentric study of 2236 patients treated by gamma knife,46 complications, including symptomatic and permanent radiation-induced changes, were reported in 9% and 3%, respectively, and the risk of postradiation hemorrhage was 1.1% annually and 9% in total for patients with a history of hemorrhage and 6% for those without a history of hemorrhage. The risk of hemorrhage increases with increasing age, deeply located AVMs, and increasing prescription isodose volume.38 The radiation-induced complications occurred at intervals of 6–18 months, and the most important risk factors were radiation dose and location of the AVM.46,47 Brain stem and deep location such as the thalamus were reported to have about 4 and 2 times more irreversible symptomatic adverse radiation reaction (11% and 7%) than other locations, respectively.47

Limitations

Our study presents several limitations. There are inherent selection biases due to the observational design of this work. Notably, about 20% of patients were not included in the study because their treatment was still ongoing, and the outcomes of these patients might modify our results. The monocentric nature of the study could also affect the results. No treatment from this series was performed through a venous approach (an alternative endovascular approach that has recently gained wider acceptance); our study thus does not have insight into this technique. Other interesting anatomic features (such as number of feeders) were not prospectively collected.

Further multicenter studies, with different treatment modalities such as an operation, EVT, and radiosurgery, may better clarify the different aspects in the management of low-grade AVMs. More randomized trials are also necessary to confirm the benefits of curative treatment for unruptured BAVMs because current evidence is in favor of conservative management.

Conclusions

The results of our study show a high rate of complete exclusion by EVT for low-grade AVMs with a low complication rate (5%). Accordingly, EVT may be effective and safe for treatment of low-grade BAVMs, especially in deep and eloquent locations where an operation has many limitations.

Footnotes

  • Clinical Study: Long Term Follow-up after Embolization of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (MAV-endovasc), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02879071.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Potts MB,
    2. Lau D,
    3. Abla AA, et al
    . Current surgical results with low-grade brain arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 2015;122:912–20 doi:10.3171/2014.12.JNS14938 pmid:25658789
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Mohr JP,
    2. Parides MK,
    3. Stapf C, et al
    ; international ARUBA investigators. Medical management with or without interventional therapy for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA): a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial. Lancet 2014;383:614–21 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62302-8 pmid:24268105
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Magro E,
    2. Gentric JC,
    3. Darsaut TE, et al
    . Responses to ARUBA: a systematic review and critical analysis for the design of future arteriovenous malformation trials. J Neurosurg 2017;126:486–94 doi:10.3171/2015.6.JNS15619 pmid:27128584
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Spetzler RF,
    2. Martin NA
    . A proposed grading system for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1986;65:476–83 doi:10.3171/jns.1986.65.4.0476 pmid:3760956
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Crowley RW,
    2. Ducruet AF,
    3. McDougall CG, et al
    . Endovascular advances for brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2014;74(Suppl 1):S74–82 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000176 pmid:24402496
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Möhlenbruch M,
    2. Bendszus M,
    3. Rohde S
    . Comment on: curative embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations with Onyx—patient selection, embolization technique, and results. Clin Neuroradiol 2012;22:181–82 doi:10.1007/s00062-012-0149-y pmid:22566010
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. van Rooij WJ,
    2. Jacobs S,
    3. Sluzewski M, et al
    . Curative embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations with Onyx: patient selection, embolization technique, and results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1299–304 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2947 pmid:22383233
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. van Rooij WJ,
    2. Sluzewski M,
    3. Beute GN
    . Brain AVM embolization with Onyx. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:172–77; discussion 178 pmid:17213451
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Herial NA,
    2. Khan AA,
    3. Sherr GT, et al
    . Detachable-tip microcatheters for liquid embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations and fistulas: a United States single-center experience. Neurosurgery 2015;11(Suppl 3):404–11; discussion 411 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000839 pmid:26083156
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Maimon S,
    2. Strauss I,
    3. Frolov V, et al
    . Brain arteriovenous malformation treatment using a combination of Onyx and a new detachable tip microcatheter, SONIC: short-term results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:947–54 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1959 pmid:20190210
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Al-Shahi Salman R,
    2. White PM,
    3. Counsell CE, et al
    ; Scottish Audit of Intracranial Vascular Malformations Collaborators. Outcome after conservative management or intervention for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations. JAMA 2014;311:1661–69 doi:10.1001/jama.2014.3200 pmid:24756516
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Abud DG,
    2. Riva R,
    3. Nakiri GS, et al
    . Treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations by double arterial catheterization with simultaneous injection of Onyx: retrospective series of 17 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:152–58 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2247 pmid:20966066
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Baharvahdat H,
    2. Blanc R,
    3. Termechi R, et al
    . Hemorrhagic complications after endovascular treatment of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:978–83 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3906 pmid:24676002
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Elsenousi A,
    2. Aletich VA,
    3. Alaraj A
    . Neurological outcomes and cure rates of embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations with n-butyl cyanoacrylate or Onyx: a meta-analysis. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:265–72 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011427 pmid:25540177
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Katsaridis V,
    2. Papagiannaki C,
    3. Aimar E
    . Curative embolization of cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) with Onyx in 101 patients. Neuroradiology 2008;50:589–97 doi:10.1007/s00234-008-0382-x pmid:18408923
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Mounayer C,
    2. Hammami N,
    3. Piotin M, et al
    . Nidal embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations using Onyx in 94 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:518–23 pmid:17353327
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Cognard C,
    3. Herbreteau D, et al
    . Endovascular treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations using a liquid embolic agent: results of a prospective, multicentre study (BRAVO). Eur Radiol 2013;23:2838–45 doi:10.1007/s00330-013-2870-6 pmid:23652849
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Saatci I,
    2. Geyik S,
    3. Yavuz K, et al
    . Endovascular treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations with prolonged intranidal Onyx injection technique: long-term results in 350 consecutive patients with completed endovascular treatment course. J Neurosurg 2011;115:78–88 doi:10.3171/2011.2.JNS09830 pmid:21476804
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Xu F,
    2. Ni W,
    3. Liao Y, et al
    . Onyx embolization for the treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2011;153:869–78 doi:10.1007/s00701-010-0848-6 pmid:21046174
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Durst CR,
    2. Starke RM,
    3. Gaughen J, et al
    . A method for complete angiographic obliteration of a brain arteriovenous malformation in a single session through a single pedicle. J Clin Neurosci 2015;22:391–95 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2014.07.030 pmid:25439751
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hamilton MG,
    2. Spetzler RF
    . The prospective application of a grading system for arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 1994;34:2–6; discussion 6–7 pmid:8121564
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Heros RC,
    2. Korosue K,
    3. Diebold PM
    . Surgical excision of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: late results. Neurosurgery 1990;26:570–77; discussion 577–78 doi:10.1227/00006123-199004000-00003 pmid:2330077
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Javadpour M,
    2. Al-Mahfoudh R,
    3. Mitchell PS, et al
    . Outcome of microsurgical excision of unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations in ARUBA-eligible patients. Br J Neurosurg 2016;30:619–22 doi:10.1080/02688697.2016.1181153 pmid:27172987
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Morgan MK,
    2. Rochford AM,
    3. Tsahtsarlis A, et al
    . Surgical risks associated with the management of grade I and II brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2007;61(1 Suppl):417–22; discussion 422–24 doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000279233.81320.25 pmid:18813149
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Pikus HJ,
    2. Beach ML,
    3. Harbaugh RE
    . Microsurgical treatment of arteriovenous malformations: analysis and comparison with stereotactic radiosurgery. J Neurosurg 1998;88:641–46 doi:10.3171/jns.1998.88.4.0641 pmid:9525708
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Schaller C,
    2. Schramm J
    . Microsurgical results for small arteriovenous malformations accessible for radiosurgical or embolization treatment. Neurosurgery 1997;40:664–72; discussion 672–74 doi:10.1097/00006123-199704000-00003 pmid:9092839
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Sisti MB,
    2. Kader A,
    3. Stein BM
    . Microsurgery for 67 intracranial arteriovenous malformations less than 3 cm in diameter. J Neurosurg 1993;79:653–60 doi:10.3171/jns.1993.79.5.0653 pmid:8410243
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Sundt TM Jr.,
    2. Piepgras DG,
    3. Stevens LN
    . Surgery for supratentorial arteriovenous malformations. Clin Neurosurg 1991;37:49–115 pmid:2009702
    PubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Davidson AS,
    2. Morgan MK
    . How safe is arteriovenous malformation surgery? A prospective, observational study of surgery as first-line treatment for brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2010;66:498–504; discussion 504–05 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000365518.47684.98 pmid:20173544
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Gross BA,
    2. Duckworth EA,
    3. Getch CC, et al
    . Challenging traditional beliefs: microsurgery for arteriovenous malformations of the basal ganglia and thalamus. Neurosurgery 2008;63:393–410; discussion 410–11 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000316424.47673.03 pmid:18812951
    CrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Lawton MT,
    2. Hamilton MG,
    3. Spetzler RF
    . Multimodality treatment of deep arteriovenous malformations: thalamus, basal ganglia, and brain stem. Neurosurgery 1995;37:29–35; discussion 35–36 doi:10.1227/00006123-199507000-00004 pmid:8587687
    CrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Lin F,
    2. Jiao Y,
    3. Wu J, et al
    . Effect of functional MRI-guided navigation on surgical outcomes: a prospective controlled trial in patients with arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 2017;126:1863–72 doi:10.3171/2016.4.JNS1616 pmid:27367242
    CrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Johnston JL,
    2. Johnston IH
    . The surgical treatment of small deep intracranial arteriovenous malformations: a report of 85 cases. J Clin Neurosci 1996;3:338–45 doi:10.1016/S0967-5868(96)90030-2 pmid:18638899
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Liu KD,
    2. Lee LS
    . Microsurgical treatment of deep arteriovenous malformations–basal ganglia and thalamus. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei) 2001;64:23–30 pmid:11310368
    PubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Potts MB,
    2. Jahangiri A,
    3. Jen M, et al
    ; UCSF Brain AVM Study Project. Deep arteriovenous malformations in the basal ganglia, thalamus, and insula: multimodality management, patient selection, and results. World Neurosurg 2014;82:386–94 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2014.03.033 pmid:24657255
    CrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. U HS,
    2. Kerber CW,
    3. Todd MM
    . Multimodality treatment of deep periventricular cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Surg Neurol 1992;38:192–203 doi:10.1016/0090-3019(92)90169-N pmid:1440204
    CrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Arslan I,
    2. Tezcanli E,
    3. Yilmaz M, et al
    . Gamma knife radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations: clinical series of 199 patients. Turk Neurosurg 2017;27:301–08 doi:10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.15330-15.0 pmid:27509452
    CrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Pollock BE,
    2. Link MJ,
    3. Stafford SL, et al
    . Stereotactic radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations: the effect of treatment period on patient outcomes. Neurosurgery 2016;78:499–509 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001085 pmid:26990410
    CrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Bin Rosli FJ,
    2. Mohammed Haspani MS,
    3. Izaini Ab Ghani AR
    . Comparing monomodality treatments of low-grade intracranial arteriovenous malformation at Hospital Kuala Lumpur between 2008 and 2011: a retrospective study. Asian J Neurosurg 2016;11:22–28 doi:10.4103/1793-5482.172595 pmid:26889274
    CrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Boström JP,
    2. Bruckermann R,
    3. Pintea B, et al
    . Treatment of cerebral arteriovenous malformations with radiosurgery or hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in a consecutive pooled linear accelerator series. World Neurosurg 2016;94:328–38 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2016.07.016 pmid:27423196
    CrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Ding D,
    2. Yen CP,
    3. Xu Z, et al
    . Radiosurgery for low-grade intracranial arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 2014;121:457–67 doi:10.3171/2014.1.JNS131713 pmid:24605839
    CrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Friedman WA,
    2. Bova FJ,
    3. Bollampally S, et al
    . Analysis of factors predictive of success or complications in arteriovenous malformation radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 2003;52:296–307; discussion 307–08 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000043692.51385.91 pmid:12535357
    CrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Kano H,
    2. Kondziolka D,
    3. Flickinger JC, et al
    . Stereotactic radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations after embolization: a case-control study. J Neurosurg 2012;117:265–75 doi:10.3171/2012.4.JNS111935 pmid:22631689
    CrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. Koltz MT,
    2. Polifka AJ,
    3. Saltos A, et al
    . Long-term outcome of gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations graded by the Spetzler-Martin classification. J Neurosurg 2013;118:74–83 doi:10.3171/2012.9.JNS112329 pmid:23082882
    CrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Pollock BE,
    2. Lunsford LD,
    3. Kondziolka D, et al
    . Patient outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery for “operable” arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 1994;35:1–7; discussion 7–8 doi:10.1227/00006123-199407000-00001 pmid:7936129
    CrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Starke RM,
    2. Kano H,
    3. Ding D, et al
    . Stereotactic radiosurgery for cerebral arteriovenous malformations: evaluation of long-term outcomes in a multicenter cohort. J Neurosurg 2017;126:36–44 doi:10.3171/2015.9.JNS151311 pmid:26943847
    CrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    1. Kano H,
    2. Flickinger JC,
    3. Tonetti D, et al
    . Estimating the risks of adverse radiation effects after gamma knife radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. Stroke 2017;48:84–90 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.014825 pmid:27899758
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received September 25, 2018.
  • Accepted after revision January 8, 2019.
  • © 2019 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 40 (4)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 40, Issue 4
1 Apr 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Endovascular Treatment for Low-Grade (Spetzler-Martin I–II) Brain Arteriovenous Malformations
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
H. Baharvahdat, R. Blanc, R. Fahed, S. Smajda, G. Ciccio, J.-P. Desilles, H. Redjem, S. Escalard, M. Mazighi, D. Chauvet, T. Robert, P. Sasannejad, M. Piotin
Endovascular Treatment for Low-Grade (Spetzler-Martin I–II) Brain Arteriovenous Malformations
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2019, 40 (4) 668-672; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5988

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Endovascular Treatment for Low-Grade (Spetzler-Martin I–II) Brain Arteriovenous Malformations
H. Baharvahdat, R. Blanc, R. Fahed, S. Smajda, G. Ciccio, J.-P. Desilles, H. Redjem, S. Escalard, M. Mazighi, D. Chauvet, T. Robert, P. Sasannejad, M. Piotin
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2019, 40 (4) 668-672; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5988
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Comparing stand-alone endovascular embolization versus stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of arteriovenous malformations with Spetzler-Martin grades I-III: a propensity score matched study
  • Adenosine-assisted embolization of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Preoperative embolization of brain arteriovenous malformation and efficacy in intraoperative blood loss reduction: a quantitative study
  • Endovascular treatment as the main approach for Spetzler-Martin grade III brain arteriovenous malformations
  • Curing Low-Grade Brain AVMs with Embolization?
  • Crossref (16)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Endovascular treatment as the main approach for Spetzler–Martin grade III brain arteriovenous malformations
    Humain Baharvahdat, Raphaël Blanc, Robert Fahed, Ashkan Pooyan, Ashkan Mowla, Simon Escalard, François Delvoye, Jean Philippe Desilles, Hocine Redjem, Gabriele Ciccio, Stanislas Smajda, Mylène Hamdani, Mikael Mazighi, Michel Piotin
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2021 13 3
  • The SMART Registry: Long-Term Results on the Utility of the Penumbra SMART COIL System for Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms and Other Malformations
    Alejandro M. Spiotta, Min S. Park, Richard J. Bellon, Bradley N. Bohnstedt, Albert J. Yoo, Clemens M. Schirmer, Reade A. DeLeacy, David J. Fiorella, B. Keith Woodward, Harris E. Hawk, Ashish Nanda, Osama O. Zaidat, Peter J. Sunenshine, Kenneth C. Liu, Mouhammed R. Kabbani, Kenneth V. Snyder, Thinesh Sivapatham, Travis M. Dumont, Alan R. Reeves, Robert M. Starke
    Frontiers in Neurology 2021 12
  • Preoperative embolization of brain arteriovenous malformation and efficacy in intraoperative blood loss reduction: a quantitative study
    Denise Brunozzi, Laura Stone McGuire, Jessica Hossa, Gursant Atwal, Fady T Charbel, Ali Alaraj
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2024 16 6
  • Current perspectives and trends in the treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations: a review and bibliometric analysis
    Weixia Tang, Yang Chen, Li Ma, Yu Chen, Biao Yang, Ren Li, Ziao Li, Yongqiang Wu, Xiaogang Wang, Xiaolong Guo, Wenju Zhang, Xiaolin Chen, Ming Lv, Yuanli Zhao, Geng Guo
    Frontiers in Neurology 2024 14
  • Exclusion treatment of ruptured and unruptured low-grade brain arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review
    Maichael Talaat, Kévin Premat, Stéphanie Lenck, Eimad Shotar, Anne-Laure Boch, Awad Bessar, Mohammed Taema, Farouk Hassan, Tamer S. Elserafy, Vincent Degos, Nader Sourour, Frédéric Clarençon
    Neuroradiology 2022 64 1
  • Arteriovenous Malformations in the Setting of Osler-Weber-Rendu: What the Radiologist Needs to Know
    Katherine E. Lantz, Samuel Q. Armstrong, Frederick Butt, Michelle L. Wang, Rulon Hardman, Julianna M. Czum
    Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology 2022 51 3
  • Management of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations: A Review
    Nitesh Naranbhai, Raúl Pérez
    Cureus 2023
  • Comparing stand-alone endovascular embolization versus stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of arteriovenous malformations with Spetzler-Martin grades I–III: a propensity score matched study
    Basel Musmar, Nimer Adeeb, Joanna M. Roy, Hammam Abdalrazeq, Stavropoula I Tjoumakaris, Elias Atallah, Hamza Adel Salim, Douglas Kondziolka, Jason Sheehan, Christopher S Ogilvy, Howard Riina, Sandeep Kandregula, Adam A Dmytriw, Kareem El Naamani, Ahmed Abdelsalam, Natasha Ironside, Deepak Kumbhare, Cagdas Ataoglu, Muhammed Amir Essibayi, Abdullah Keles, Sandeep Muram, Daniel Sconzo, Arwin Rezai, Ufuk Erginoglu, Johannes Pöppe, Rajeev D Sen, Christoph J Griessenauer, Jan-Karl Burkhardt, Robert M Starke, Mustafa K Baskaya, Laligam N Sekhar, Michael R Levitt, David J Altschul, Malia McAvoy, Assala Aslan, Abdallah Abushehab, Christian Swaid, Adib A Abla, M. Reid Gooch, Robert H Rosenwasser, Christopher Stapleton, Matthew Koch, Visish M Srinivasan, Peng R Chen, Spiros Blackburn, Mark J Dannenbaum, Omar Choudhri, Bryan Pukenas, Darren Orbach, Edward Smith, Pascal J Mosimann, Ali Alaraj, Mohammad A Aziz-Sultan, Aman B Patel, Hugo H Cuellar, Michael T Lawton, Jacques Morcos, Bharat Guthikonda, Pascal Jabbour
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2024
  • Experience of intracranial arteriovenous malformations endovascular treatment with advanced techniques and non-adhesive liquid embolic agents using
    Yu.V. Cherednichenko, L.A. Dzyak, E.S. Tsurkalenko
    Endovascular Neuroradiology 2020 33 3
  • Adenosine-assisted embolization of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Jhon E Bocanegra-Becerra, Filipi Fim Andreão, José Luis Acha Sánchez, Anuraag Punukollu, Leonardo B Oliveira, Krish Kuhar, Maria Eduarda Rodrigues Peixoto, Elizabet Taylor Pimenta Weba, Khaled Alhwaishel, Marcio Yuri Ferreira, Raphael Bertani, Miguel Angel Lopez-Gonzalez
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2024

More in this TOC Section

  • SAVE vs. Solumbra Techniques for Thrombectomy
  • CT Perfusion&Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke
  • Delayed Reperfusion Post-Thrombectomy&Thrombolysis
Show more Interventional

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire