Dural arteriovenous fistulas at the craniocervical junction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurosurgical Review Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1007/s10143-024-03018-3
Jumanah Qedair, Kiran Sankarappan, Mohammad Mirahmadi Eraghi, Zachary C Gersey, Prateek Agarwal, Sharath Kumar Anand, Paolo Palmisciano, Matthew Blackwell, Seyed Farzad Maroufi, Salah G Aoun, Tarek Y El Ahmadieh, Aaron A Cohen-Gadol, Othman Bin-Alamer
{"title":"Dural arteriovenous fistulas at the craniocervical junction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jumanah Qedair, Kiran Sankarappan, Mohammad Mirahmadi Eraghi, Zachary C Gersey, Prateek Agarwal, Sharath Kumar Anand, Paolo Palmisciano, Matthew Blackwell, Seyed Farzad Maroufi, Salah G Aoun, Tarek Y El Ahmadieh, Aaron A Cohen-Gadol, Othman Bin-Alamer","doi":"10.1007/s10143-024-03018-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management for craniocervical junction dural arteriovenous fistulas (CCJ-DAVFs) remains controversial and clinically challenging. We systemically summarized the clinical and angiographic outcomes of microsurgery, embolization, and conservative management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane, following PRISMA guidelines. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the clinical characteristics, management approaches, and clinical and angiographic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 13 articles (166 patients). The weighted mean age was 58.9 years (95%CI: 53.2-64.5), 58.8 years (95%CI: 48.4-69.2), and 63.8 years (95%CI: 60.1-67.5), in microsurgery, embolization, and conservative groups respectively, with an overall male sex predominance (microsurgery [n = 51/77, 66.2%], embolization [n = 44/56, 78.6%], and conservative management [n = 6/8, 75.0%]). Patients were managed with microsurgery (n = 80/172, 46.5%), embolization (n = 79/172, 45.9%), and conservative treatment (n = 13/172, 7.6%). Foramen magnum was the most common location (microsurgery [n = 34/77, 44.2%], embolization [n = 31/56, 55.4%], and conservative treatment [n = 3/8, 37.5%]). Vertebral artery was the primary feeder (microsurgery [n = 58/84, 69.1%], embolization [n = 41/86, 47.6%], and conservative treatment [n = 4/7, 57.1%]). Complete fistula obliteration rates were 74.1% (95%CI:52.3-88.2%) in the microsurgery group and 54.9% (95%CI:30.7-77.0%) in the embolization group. Complications rates were 16.2% (95%CI:6.7-34.5%) in the embolization group, 11.6% (95%CI:3.8-30.4%) in the microsurgery group, and 7.7% (95%CI:1.1-39.1%) in the conservative group. Different rates of good clinical outcomes were observed [microsurgery: 66.4% (95%CI:48.1-80.8%), embolization: 51.9% (95%CI:30.8-72.4%), and conservative: 11.6% (95%CI:4.4-27.4%)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with CCJ-DAVFs, each management approach has its own merits based on the fistula and patient characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":19184,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical Review","volume":"47 1","pages":"812"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-03018-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The management for craniocervical junction dural arteriovenous fistulas (CCJ-DAVFs) remains controversial and clinically challenging. We systemically summarized the clinical and angiographic outcomes of microsurgery, embolization, and conservative management.

Methods: Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane, following PRISMA guidelines. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the clinical characteristics, management approaches, and clinical and angiographic outcomes.

Results: We included 13 articles (166 patients). The weighted mean age was 58.9 years (95%CI: 53.2-64.5), 58.8 years (95%CI: 48.4-69.2), and 63.8 years (95%CI: 60.1-67.5), in microsurgery, embolization, and conservative groups respectively, with an overall male sex predominance (microsurgery [n = 51/77, 66.2%], embolization [n = 44/56, 78.6%], and conservative management [n = 6/8, 75.0%]). Patients were managed with microsurgery (n = 80/172, 46.5%), embolization (n = 79/172, 45.9%), and conservative treatment (n = 13/172, 7.6%). Foramen magnum was the most common location (microsurgery [n = 34/77, 44.2%], embolization [n = 31/56, 55.4%], and conservative treatment [n = 3/8, 37.5%]). Vertebral artery was the primary feeder (microsurgery [n = 58/84, 69.1%], embolization [n = 41/86, 47.6%], and conservative treatment [n = 4/7, 57.1%]). Complete fistula obliteration rates were 74.1% (95%CI:52.3-88.2%) in the microsurgery group and 54.9% (95%CI:30.7-77.0%) in the embolization group. Complications rates were 16.2% (95%CI:6.7-34.5%) in the embolization group, 11.6% (95%CI:3.8-30.4%) in the microsurgery group, and 7.7% (95%CI:1.1-39.1%) in the conservative group. Different rates of good clinical outcomes were observed [microsurgery: 66.4% (95%CI:48.1-80.8%), embolization: 51.9% (95%CI:30.8-72.4%), and conservative: 11.6% (95%CI:4.4-27.4%)].

Conclusions: In patients with CCJ-DAVFs, each management approach has its own merits based on the fistula and patient characteristics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颅颈交界处的硬脑膜动静脉瘘:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:颅颈交界处硬脑膜动静脉瘘(CCJ-DAVFs)的治疗仍存在争议,在临床上具有挑战性。我们系统总结了显微手术、栓塞术和保守治疗的临床和血管造影结果:按照 PRISMA 指南,从 PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 检索相关文章。结果:我们纳入了 13 篇文章(166 名患者):我们共纳入了 13 篇文章(166 名患者)。显微手术组、栓塞组和保守治疗组的加权平均年龄分别为 58.9 岁(95%CI:53.2-64.5)、58.8 岁(95%CI:48.4-69.2)和 63.8 岁(95%CI:60.1-67.5),总体上男性占多数(显微手术[n = 51/77,66.2%]、栓塞[n = 44/56,78.6%]和保守治疗[n = 6/8,75.0%])。患者接受显微手术治疗(80/172,46.5%)、栓塞治疗(79/172,45.9%)和保守治疗(13/172,7.6%)。枕骨大孔是最常见的位置(显微手术[n = 34/77,44.2%]、栓塞[n = 31/56,55.4%]和保守治疗[n = 3/8,37.5%])。椎动脉是主要供血动脉(显微手术[n = 58/84,69.1%]、栓塞[n = 41/86,47.6%]和保守治疗[n = 4/7,57.1%])。显微手术组的瘘管完全阻塞率为 74.1%(95%CI:52.3-88.2%),栓塞组为 54.9%(95%CI:30.7-77.0%)。栓塞组的并发症发生率为 16.2% (95%CI:6.7-34.5%),显微手术组为 11.6% (95%CI:3.8-30.4%),保守治疗组为 7.7% (95%CI:1.1-39.1%)。观察到了不同的良好临床结果率[显微手术组:66.4%(95%CI:1.1-39.166.4%(95%CI:48.1-80.8%),栓塞术:结论:对于CCJ-DAVFs患者,根据瘘管和患者特征,每种治疗方法都有其自身的优点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurosurgical Review
Neurosurgical Review 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
191
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The goal of Neurosurgical Review is to provide a forum for comprehensive reviews on current issues in neurosurgery. Each issue contains up to three reviews, reflecting all important aspects of one topic (a disease or a surgical approach). Comments by a panel of experts within the same issue complete the topic. By providing comprehensive coverage of one topic per issue, Neurosurgical Review combines the topicality of professional journals with the indepth treatment of a monograph. Original papers of high quality are also welcome.
期刊最新文献
Showcasing diversity, equity, and inclusion in neurological surgery: a comparative analysis of neurological surgery residency program websites in the United States. Anterior choroidal artery aneurysm case series: a clinical decision algorithm for endovascular and surgical treatment using a novel classification system. Minimally invasive neurosurgery: application of burr-hole technique across a spectrum of brain lesions. Oculomotor nerve palsy recovery following microsurgery vs. endovascular treatment of posterior communicating artery aneurysms: a comparative meta-analysis of short- and long-term outcomes. Application of microsurgical surgery in patients with proximal vertebral artery stenosis unsuited for endovascular treatment: a single-center retrospective study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1