Feliciano, Caleb

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) can cause radiation-induced changes (RIC), but its interactions with AVM embolization are not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of previous embolization on RIC in SRS-treated AVM patients. METHODS: Data of AVM patients treated with single-session SRS from 1987 to 2018 were retrieved from the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation. Univariable and stepwise backward logistic regression models were used to identify RIC predictors. Patients were stratified into those who received pre-SRS embolization (E + SRS) vs those who did not (SRS-only). Radiologic RIC (rRIC) was the primary end point. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic RIC (sRIC) and permanent symptomatic RIC (pRIC). RESULTS: Among 1187 AVM patients, the mean age was 36.4 years (SD 16.8), with 50.4% female patients. AVMs had a mean untreated AVM volume of 5.2 cm 3 . A total of 130 patients (11%) underwent neoadjuvant embolization (E + SRS). The overall rRIC and sRIC rates were 32.8% and 12.1%, respectively, with time to rRIC and sRIC being significantly longer in the E + SRS vs SRS-only cohorts (103.6 ± 339.4 vs 11.3 ± 12.5 and 60.4 ± 262.9 vs 9.5 ± 9.0 months, respectively). Seizures at presentation and ≥3-cm untreated AVM volume significantly correlated with a higher likelihood of rRIC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.32 [1.25-4.30] and aOR 2.77 [1.24-6.16], respectively). Age and pre-SRS embolization were associated with a significantly lower risk of rRIC (aOR 0.97 [0.96-0.99] and aOR 0.32 [0.13-0.74], respectively). The E + SRS cohort had significantly reduced odds of rRIC (aOR = 0.37 [0.15-0.89]) and pRIC (aOR = 0.04 [0.00-0.30]) after adjusting for significant covariates. CONCLUSION: Seizures at presentation and larger untreated AVM volume were independently associated with an increased risk of rRIC, whereas older age and pre-SRS embolization were protective. Notably, patients who underwent embolization before SRS had lower odds of rRIC and pRIC, with delayed onset of complications compared with SRS-only.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with neoadjuvant embolization is a treatment strategy for brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs), especially for those with large nidal volume or concomitant aneurysms. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of pre-SRS embolization in AVMs with an associated intracranial aneurysm (IA). METHODS: The International Radiosurgery Research Foundation AVM database from 1987 to 2018 was retrospectively reviewed. SRS-treated AVMs with IAs were included. Patients were categorized into those treated with upfront embolization (E + SRS) vs stand-alone SRS (SRS). Primary end point was a favorable outcome (AVM obliteration + no permanent radiation-induced changes or post-SRS hemorrhage). Secondary outcomes included AVM obliteration, mortality, follow-up modified Rankin Scale, post-SRS hemorrhage, and radiation-induced changes. RESULTS: Forty four AVM patients with associated IAs were included, of which 23 (52.3%) underwent pre-SRS embolization and 21 (47.7%) SRS only. Significant differences between the E + SRS vs SRS groups were found for AVM maximum diameter (1.5 ± 0.5 vs 1.1 ± 0.4 cm 3 , P = .019) and SRS treatment volume (9.3 ± 8.3 vs 4.3 ± 3.3 cm 3 , P = .025). A favorable outcome was achieved in 45.4% of patients in the E + SRS group and 38.1% in the SRS group ( P = .625). Obliteration rates were comparable (56.5% for E + SRS vs 47.6% for SRS, P = .555), whereas a higher mortality rate was found in the SRS group (19.1% vs 0%, P = .048). After adjusting for AVM maximum diameter, SRS treatment volume, and maximum radiation dose, the likelihood of achieving favorable outcome and AVM obliteration did not differ between groups ( P = .475 and P = .820, respectively). CONCLUSION: The likelihood of a favorable outcome and AVM obliteration after SRS with neoadjuvant embolization in AVMs with concomitant IA seems to be comparable with stand-alone SRS, even after adjusting for AVM volume and SRS maximum dose. However, the increased mortality among the stand-alone SRS group and relatively low risk of embolization-related complications suggest that these patients may benefit from a combined treatment approach.

OBJECTIVE Investigations of the combined effects of neoadjuvant Onyx embolization and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) on brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) have not accounted for initial angioarchitectural features prior to neuroendovascular intervention. The aim of this retrospective, multicenter matched cohort study is to compare the outcomes of SRS with versus without upfront Onyx embolization for AVMs using de novo characteristics of the preembolized nidus. METHODS The International Radiosurgery Research Foundation AVM databases from 1987 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized based on AVM treatment approach into Onyx embolization (OE) and SRS (OE+SRS) or SRS alone (SRS-only) cohorts and then propensity score matched in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was AVM obliteration. Secondary outcomes were post-SRS hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, radiological and symptomatic radiation-induced changes (RICs), and cyst formation. Comparisons were analyzed using crude rates and cumulative probabilities adjusted for competing risk of death. RESULTS The matched OE+SRS and SRS-only cohorts each comprised 53 patients. Crude rates (37.7% vs 47.2% for the OE+SRS vs SRS-only cohorts, respectively; OR 0.679, p = 0.327) and cumulative probabilities at 3, 4, 5, and 6 years (33.7%, 44.1%, 57.5%, and 65.7% for the OE+SRS cohort vs 34.8%, 45.5%, 59.0%, and 67.1% for the SRS-only cohort, respectively; subhazard ratio 0.961, p = 0.896) of AVM obliteration were similar between the matched cohorts. The secondary outcomes of the matched cohorts were also similar. Asymptomatic and symptomatic embolization-related complication rates in the matched OE+SRS cohort were 18.9% and 9.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Pre-SRS AVM embolization with Onyx does not appear to negatively influence outcomes after SRS. These analyses, based on de novo nidal characteristics, thereby refute previous studies that found detrimental effects of Onyx embolization on SRS-induced AVM obliteration. However, given the risks incurred by nidal embolization using Onyx, this neoadjuvant intervention should be used judiciously in multimodal treatment strategies involving SRS for appropriately selected large-volume or angioarchitecturally high-risk AVMs.

Abstract BACKGROUND Prior comparisons of brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) treated using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with or without embolization were inherently flawed, due to differences in the pretreatment nidus volumes. OBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes of embolization and SRS, vs SRS alone for AVMs using pre-embolization malformation features. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed International Radiosurgery Research Foundation AVM databases from 1987 to 2018. Patients were categorized into the embolization and SRS (E + SRS) or SRS alone (SRS-only) cohorts. The 2 cohorts were matched in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores. Primary outcome was defined as AVM obliteration. Secondary outcomes were post-SRS hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, radiologic and symptomatic radiation-induced changes (RIC), and cyst formation. RESULTS The matched cohorts each comprised 101 patients. Crude AVM obliteration rates were similar between the matched E + SRS vs SRS-only cohorts (48.5% vs 54.5%; odds ratio = 0.788, P = .399). Cumulative probabilities of obliteration at 3, 4, 5, and 6 yr were also similar between the E + SRS (33.0%, 46.4%, 56.2%, and 60.8%, respectively) and SRS-only (32.9%, 46.2%, 56.0%, and 60.6%, respectively) cohorts (subhazard ratio (SHR) = 1.005, P = .981). Cumulative probabilities of radiologic RIC at 3, 4, 5, and 6 yr were lower in the E + SRS (25.0%, 25.7%, 26.7%, and 26.7%, respectively) vs SRS-only (45.3%, 46.2%, 47.8%, and 47.8%, respectively) cohort (SHR = 0.478, P = .004). Symptomatic and asymptomatic embolization-related complication rates were 8.3% and 18.6%, respectively. Rates of post-SRS hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, symptomatic RIC, and cyst formation were similar between the matched cohorts. CONCLUSION This study refutes the prevalent notion that AVM embolization negatively affects the likelihood of obliteration after SRS.

Abstract BACKGROUND Embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) using ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer (Onyx) embolization may influence the treatment effects of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) differently than other embolysates. OBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes of pre-SRS AVM embolization with vs without Onyx through a multicenter, retrospective matched cohort study. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed International Radiosurgery Research Foundation AVM databases from 1987 to 2018. Embolized AVMs treated with SRS were selected and categorized based on embolysate usage into Onyx embolization (OE + SRS) or non-Onyx embolization (NOE + SRS) cohorts. The 2 cohorts were matched in a 1:1 ratio using de novo AVM features for comparative analysis of outcomes. RESULTS The matched cohorts each comprised 45 patients. Crude AVM obliteration rates were similar between the matched OE + SRS vs NOE + SRS cohorts (47% vs 51%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.837, P = .673). Cumulative probabilities of obliteration were also similar between the OE + SRS vs NOE + SRS cohorts (subhazard ratio = 0.992, P = .980). Rates of post-SRS hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, radiation-induced changes, cyst formation, and embolization-associated complications were similar between the matched cohorts. Sensitivity analysis for AVMs in the OE + SRS cohort embolized with Onyx alone revealed a higher rate of asymptomatic embolization-associated complications in this subgroup compared to the NOE + SRS cohort (36% vs 15%; OR = 3.297, P = .034), but the symptomatic complication rates were similar. CONCLUSION Nidal embolization using Onyx does not appear to differentially impact the outcomes of AVM SRS compared with non-Onyx embolysates. The embolic agent selected for pre-SRS AVM embolization should reflect both the experience of the neurointerventionalist and target of endovascular intervention.