PURPOSE: To present the treatment outcome after embolization of arteriovenous malformations. METHODS: All patients with cerebral arteriovenous malformations treated in 1987 and 1988 (27 patients, group I) and in 1992 and 1993 (35 patients, group II) were compared regarding treatment results and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Complications of the treatment occurred in 52% of group I and 22% of group II patients. Severe complications occurred in 11 % and 0%, respectively. There were no treatment deaths. Thirty percent of the arteriovenous malformations in the first group were totally occluded or made accessible for gamma knife treatment, compared with 69% of the arteriovenous malformations in the second group. The clinical outcome improved from 56% with an excellent or good outcome in group I, to 89% in group II. The follow-up time is much shorter in group II, 1.5 versus 5.5 years in group I. CONCLUSION: A definite improvement in treatment outcome has been achieved. The clinical outcome seems to have improved as well, although the shorter follow-up time makes this conclusion less certain.
PURPOSE: To present the treatment outcome after embolization of arteriovenous malformations. METHODS: All patients with cerebral arteriovenous malformations treated in 1987 and 1988 (27 patients, group I) and in 1992 and 1993 (35 patients, group II) were compared regarding treatment results and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Complications of the treatment occurred in 52% of group I and 22% of group II patients. Severe complications occurred in 11 % and 0%, respectively. There were no treatment deaths. Thirty percent of the arteriovenous malformations in the first group were totally occluded or made accessible for gamma knife treatment, compared with 69% of the arteriovenous malformations in the second group. The clinical outcome improved from 56% with an excellent or good outcome in group I, to 89% in group II. The follow-up time is much shorter in group II, 1.5 versus 5.5 years in group I. CONCLUSION: A definite improvement in treatment outcome has been achieved. The clinical outcome seems to have improved as well, although the shorter follow-up time makes this conclusion less certain.
Authors: H A Desal; F Toulgoat; S Raoul; B Guillon; R Al Hammad Ibrahim; E Auffray-Calvier; A De Kersaint-Gilly Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2005-10-27 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: M Cronqvist; R Wirestam; B Ramgren; L Brandt; B Romner; O Nilsson; H Säveland; S Holtås; E-M Larsson Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Robert M Starke; Ricardo J Komotar; Marc L Otten; David K Hahn; Laura E Fischer; Brian Y Hwang; Matthew C Garrett; Robert R Sciacca; Michael B Sisti; Robert A Solomon; Sean D Lavine; E Sander Connolly; Philip M Meyers Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-05-28 Impact factor: 7.914