| Literature DB >> 31359618 |
Sonali S Shaligram1, Ethan Winkler2, Daniel Cooke3, Hua Su1.
Abstract
Patients with brain arteriovenous malformation (bAVM) are at risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Overall, bAVM accounts for 25% of hemorrhagic strokes in adults <50 years of age. The treatment of unruptured bAVMs has become controversial, because the natural history of these patients may be less morbid than invasive therapies. Available treatments include observation, surgical resection, endovascular embolization, stereotactic radiosurgery, or combination thereof. Knowing the risk factors for bAVM hemorrhage is crucial for selecting appropriate therapeutic strategies. In this review, we discussed several biological risk factors, which may contribute to bAVM hemorrhage.Entities:
Keywords: brain arteriovenous malformation; hemodynamic; intracranial hemorrhage; vascular endothelial growth factor; vascular integrity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31359618 PMCID: PMC6776739 DOI: 10.1111/cns.13200
Source DB: PubMed Journal: CNS Neurosci Ther ISSN: 1755-5930 Impact factor: 5.243
Figure 1The risk factors for brain AVM hemorrhage. Brain AVMs have increased level of VEGF, reduced mural cell coverage, and altered hemodynamics. All of these increase the risk of brain AVM hemorrhage. Alteration in hemodynamics including high flow, increased wall shear stress, and VH can also induce inflammation, BBB leakage, and elevation of VEGF levels, which further increases the risk of hemorrhage. Thalidomide and lenalidomide treatment increase EC PDGFB production and pericyte recruitment. Overexpression of Pdgfb could be another therapeutic strategy to improve BBB integrity. Bevacizumab treatment and intravenous injection of AAV‐sFLT1 vectors that express the extracellular domain of VEGF receptor 1 blocks excess VEGF and inhibits the bAVM formation and progression
The advantages and disadvantages of current bAVM treatments
| Treatment | Advantages | Disadvantages | Usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Microsurgery |
High complete angiographic exclusion (CAE) rates (>90%) for lower grade lesions Immediate effect (better for hemorrhagic lesions) Tissue collection for genetic analysis |
Invasive (morbidity) Operator dependent |
Multiple, prospective, and retrospective case series |
| Radiosurgery |
Less invasive Decreased morbidity for higher grade lesions Less operator dependent Reduced cost |
Delayed effect Lower rates of CAE (relative microsurgery) Requires multiple sessions Adverse radiation associated events |
Multiple, prospective, and retrospective case series |
| Embolization |
Less invasive Immediate effect (better for hemorrhagic lesions) |
Operator dependent Heterogeneous materials and technical details Lower rates of CAE (relative microsurgery) May require multiple sessions Cost |
Few, small prospective and retrospective case series |
| Combination therapy (M + E) |
For higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, postembolization reduced operative blood loss Targeted embolization of high‐risk features (ie aneurysms) Higher CAE for higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, relative to monotherapy More immediate effect |
Cost Increased morbidity Less standardized |
Few, small retrospective series |
| Combination therapy (M + R) |
For higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, postradiosurgery reduced nidal volume to facilitate resection Targeted fibrosis of eloquent regions (eg, brainstem) prior to resection Higher CAE for higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, relative to monotherapy |
Delayed effect Cost Adverse radiation associated events |
Few, small retrospective series |
| Combination therapy (R + E) |
For higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, postradiosurgery reduced nidal volume to facilitate embolization Targeted fibrosis of high‐risk regions (eg, brainstem) prior to embolization Targeted embolization of high‐risk features (ie aneurysms) |
Delayed effect Cost Heterogeneous effects depending order of treatment Less standardized Adverse radiation associated events |
Few, small retrospective series |
| Combination therapy (R + E + M) |
For higher grade (SM > 3) lesions, postembolization reduced operative blood loss Targeted embolization of high‐risk features (ie aneurysms) Higher CAE for higher grade (SM > 2) lesions, relative to monotherapy More immediate effect |
Cost Delayed effect Cost Heterogeneous effects depending order of treatment |
Few, small retrospective series |