PURPOSE: Angiographic finding including venous drainage pattern should be correlated to the presenting symptom pattern (SxP) in CSDAVF. We present outcome of CSDAVF management and suggest a strategy according to SxP and type of treatment based on our experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated SxP, angiographic type (proliferative, restrictive or late restrictive), mode of treatment (embolization, Gamma Knife Radiation (GKR) or conservative management), mode of embolization (transarterial or transvenous), and final clinical status (cure, improvement, aggravation or no change). Ninety consecutive patients were included from a prospective database. The mean follow-up was 17 months. We compared the outcomes according to SxP, angiographic type, mode of treatment, and embolization using the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Ninety patients with 34 proliferative, 40 restrictive, and 16 late restrictive types of CSDAVF were treated by embolization (n = 63), GKR (n = 7), and conservative management (n = 20). Cure or improvement was 91% after embolization, 88% after conservative management, and 72% after GKR. Following embolization, 100% of 24 proliferative types, 87% of 30 restrictive types, and 90% of 10 late restrictive types were cured or improved. Cure or improvement after transvenous embolization was 98% (43/44) compared with 88% (15/17) after transarterial embolization (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Various factors of SxP, angiographic type, and mode of treatment should be considered in order to obtain a more favorable outcome for patients with CSDAVF. Embolization via venous approach tended to result in a more complete cure than that via arterial approach.
PURPOSE: Angiographic finding including venous drainage pattern should be correlated to the presenting symptom pattern (SxP) in CSDAVF. We present outcome of CSDAVF management and suggest a strategy according to SxP and type of treatment based on our experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated SxP, angiographic type (proliferative, restrictive or late restrictive), mode of treatment (embolization, Gamma Knife Radiation (GKR) or conservative management), mode of embolization (transarterial or transvenous), and final clinical status (cure, improvement, aggravation or no change). Ninety consecutive patients were included from a prospective database. The mean follow-up was 17 months. We compared the outcomes according to SxP, angiographic type, mode of treatment, and embolization using the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Ninety patients with 34 proliferative, 40 restrictive, and 16 late restrictive types of CSDAVF were treated by embolization (n = 63), GKR (n = 7), and conservative management (n = 20). Cure or improvement was 91% after embolization, 88% after conservative management, and 72% after GKR. Following embolization, 100% of 24 proliferative types, 87% of 30 restrictive types, and 90% of 10 late restrictive types were cured or improved. Cure or improvement after transvenous embolization was 98% (43/44) compared with 88% (15/17) after transarterial embolization (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Various factors of SxP, angiographic type, and mode of treatment should be considered in order to obtain a more favorable outcome for patients with CSDAVF. Embolization via venous approach tended to result in a more complete cure than that via arterial approach.
Authors: Suzanne O'Leary; Timothy J Hodgson; Stuart C Coley; Andreas A Kemeny; Matthias W R Radatz Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Junichiro Satomi; J Marc C van Dijk; Karel G Terbrugge; Robert A Willinsky; M Christopher Wallace Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: C Cognard; Y P Gobin; L Pierot; A L Bailly; E Houdart; A Casasco; J Chiras; J J Merland Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 11.105