Morcos, Jacques J.

Stereotactic radiosurgery was associated with a higher obliteration rate compared with embolization in patients with eloquent brain arteriovenous malformations, whereas there was no evidence of a difference in functional outcomes or complications after adjustment.

Background and objectives Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) with perinidal aneurysms and single draining vein are associated with an elevated risk of rupture and increased procedural complexity. The role of preoperative embolization in this high-risk anatomical subset remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of microsurgery with preoperative embolization, compared with microsurgery alone in patients with such AVMs. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of an AVM registry from the MISTA (Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs) consortium and included AVMs with perinidal aneurysms and a single draining vein. Baseline characteristics, angiographic outcomes, functional outcomes, and complication rates were compared. Propensity score weighting (PSW) using the covariate balancing method was applied to adjust for baseline differences. Results Out of a total of 1919 patients, 65 met the inclusion criteria; 45 patients underwent preoperative embolization followed by microsurgery, and 20 underwent microsurgery alone. After adjustment, complete obliteration rates were similar between groups (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.04 to 16.33, P=0.92), as were rates of functional independence at discharge and follow-up. Overall complication, symptomatic complication, and mortality rates did not differ significantly between groups. However, permanent complications were significantly lower in patients with preoperative embolization (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.84, P=0.03). Discussion In patients with AVMs featuring perinidal aneurysms and single draining vein, preoperative embolization followed by microsurgery was associated with fewer permanent complications and no increase in adverse outcomes compared with microsurgery alone. However, given the small number of events, this finding should be interpreted cautiously.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Aneurysm risk prediction remains an imprecise science that places patients at risk for either over or undertreatment. Machine learning (ML) models may improve clinical practice by adding precision to risk assessment. This study aims to comprehensively assess the current landscape of ML applications in predicting the risk of aneurysm rupture and compare the performance with the widely used PHASES score. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted. All studies using ML tools to predict the rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms were included. Meta-analysis was conducted with consideration to the ML algorithms and compared with the PHASES score. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies involving 22 462 patients were included in the final analysis. ML techniques, including 124 models using 25 algorithms, were employed. Among various ML models, while they had comparable diagnostic performance, deep learning exhibited a slightly better performance profile (sensitivity = 0.792, specificity = 0.788, and accuracy = 0.778 in external validation). Based on our analysis, ML, regardless of the algorithm, provides comparable sensitivity (0.743 vs 0.771, P = .60) and higher specificity (0.763 vs 0.507, P < .01) compared with the PHASES score. Consistently, pooling the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for 60 ML models and 5 PHASES score data, ML models exhibited higher AUC (0.84 vs 0.64, P < .01). Using hemodynamic parameters as input for models improved specificity ( P < .01) in the test sets without any significant changes in the sensitivity. The later improvement was not observed in the external validation sets. CONCLUSION: ML techniques have the potential to enhance the prediction of intracranial aneurysm rupture compared with traditional approaches, like the PHASES score. Incorporating hemodynamic parameters may further enhance the accuracy of ML models. Feature prospective studies are required to validate the utility of ML models for clinical integration.

Abstract Introduction The impact of multiple feeding arteries on clinical outcomes of cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) is not well understood. This study aims to compare outcomes between AVMs with multiple versus single feeding arteries. Patients and Methods Data from the Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs (MISTA) consortium were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance cohorts. Subgroup analysis was conducted for ruptured and unruptured AVMs and different treatment options, and multivariable logistic regression was applied to assess the impact of feeding artery origin. Results Among 953 patients, 661(69.4%) had multiple feeding arteries, and 292 (30.6%) had a single feeding artery. After PSM, which included 422 matched patients (211 in each group), the differences in obliteration rates (68.7% vs 74.8%, OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.48–1.12, p = 0.16) and symptomatic complications (15.6% vs 11.8%, OR 1.37, 95% CI: 0.78–2.41, p = 0.25) were not significant. Subgroup analysis comparing ruptured and unruptured AVMs and different treatment options showed no significant differences across all subgroups. Multivariable analysis identified PICA feeders as significantly associated with increased odds of all complications (OR 7.33, 95% CI: 2.14–25.1, p = 0.002). Discussion and Conclusion AVMs with a single feeding artery were more likely to present with rupture, but no significant differences in obliteration rates or complications were observed between the groups after PSM. These findings suggest that while the number of feeding arteries may influence the initial presentation, it does not appear to impact overall treatment success or patient prognosis. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Background: Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are complex vascular anomalies with a high risk of hemorrhage and neurological deficits, especially when located in eloquent brain regions. The eloquence of an AVM location is a critical factor in the treatment planning, influencing both the risk of complications and long-term functional outcomes. This study aims to compare outcomes between eloquent and non-eloquent AVMs. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study utilized data from the Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs (MISTA) consortium. Patients with eloquent and non-eloquent AVMs were compared on baseline characteristics, angiographic outcomes, and functional outcomes using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Propensity score weighting (IPTW) was applied to adjust for confounding variables. Results: The study included 1013 patients, with 498 (49.2%) AVMs located in eloquent regions and 515 (50.8%) in non-eloquent regions. In unadjusted analysis, eloquent AVMs had lower complete obliteration rates (67.6% vs 79.5%, OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.39–0.72, p < 0.001) and higher complication rates (24.5% vs 19.0%, OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.02–1.86, p = 0.03) compared to non-eloquent AVMs. After IPTW adjustment, eloquent AVMs continued to show significantly higher odds of overall complications (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.12–2.52, p = 0.01) and symptomatic complications (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.12–2.80, p = 0.01). Secondary analysis within the eloquent group indicated that embolization was linked to an elevated risk of complications. Surgery and radiosurgery showed comparable functional outcomes at last follow-up and complications rates with higher complete obliteration rates in surgery. Conclusion: AVMs in eloquent brain areas present higher risks of complications and lower obliteration rates, emphasizing the need for cautious, individualized treatment planning. Within the eloquent group, embolization increased the risk of complications, while surgery and radiosurgery showed comparable functional outcomes at last follow-up and complication rates with higher complete obliteration rates in surgery. These findings highlight the importance of location in AVM management and support further research focusing on comparing treatment strategies for AVMs in eloquent brain areas.

Background Brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are abnormal connections between feeding arteries and draining veins, associated with significant risks of haemorrhage, seizures and other neurological deficits. Preoperative embolization is commonly used as an adjunct to microsurgical resection, with the aim of reducing intraoperative complications and improving outcomes. However, the efficacy and safety of this approach remain controversial. Methods This study is a subanalysis of the Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs consortium. We retrospectively analysed 486 patients with brain AVMs treated with microsurgical resection between January 2010 and December 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent microsurgery alone (n=245) and those who received preoperative embolization, followed by microsurgery (n=241). Propensity score matching was employed, resulting in 288 matched patients (144 in each group). The primary outcomes were rates of complete AVM obliteration and functional outcomes (measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS)). Secondary outcomes included complication rates, mortality, hospital length of stay and postsurgical rupture. Results After matching, the complete obliteration rate was 97% with no significant difference between the microsurgery-only group and the preoperative embolization group (p=0.12). The proportion of patients with an mRS score of 0–2 at the last follow-up was similar in both groups (83% vs 84%; p=0.67). The median hospital stay was significantly longer for the embolisation group (9 days vs 7 days; p=0.017). Complication rates (24% vs 22%; p=0.57) and mortality rates (4.9% vs 2.1%; p=0.20) were comparable between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in postsurgical rupture, recurrence or retreatment rates. Conclusions In this large multicentre study, preoperative embolization did not significantly improve AVM obliteration rates, functional outcomes or reduce complications compared with microsurgery alone.

Background Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are uncommon cerebral lesions that can cause significant neurological complications. Surgical resection is the gold standard for treatment, but endovascular embolization and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are viable alternatives. Objective To compare the outcomes of endovascular embolization versus SRS in the treatment of AVMs with Spetzler-Martin grades I–III. Methods This study combined retrospective data from 10 academic institutions in North America and Europe. Patients aged 1 to 90 years who underwent endovascular embolization or SRS for AVMs with Spetzler-Martin grades I–III between January 2010 and December 2023 were included. Results The study included 244 patients, including 84 who had endovascular embolization and 160 who had SRS. Before propensity score matching (PSM), complete obliteration at the last follow-up was achieved in 74.5% of the SRS group compared with 57.8% of the embolization group (OR=0.47; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.48; P=0.01). After propensity score matching, SRS still achieved significantly higher occlusion rates at last follow-up (78.9% vs 55.3%; OR=0.32; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.90; P=0.03). Hemorrhagic complications were higher in the embolization group than in the SRS group, although this difference did not reach statistical significance after PSM (13.2% vs 2.6%; OR=5.6; 95% CI 0.62 to 50.47; P=0.12). Similarly, re-treatment rate was higher in the embolization group (10.5% vs 5.3%; OR=2.11; 95% CI 0.36 to 12.31; P=0.40) compared with the SRS group. Conclusion Our findings indicate that SRS has a significantly higher obliteration rate at last follow-up compared with endovascular embolization. Also, SRS has a higher tendency for fewer hemorrhagic complications and lower re-treatment rate. Further prospective studies are needed.

OBJECTIVE Indication for surgery in brainstem cavernous malformations (BSCMs) is based on many case series, few comparative studies, and no randomized controlled trials. The objective of this study was to seek consensus about surgical management aspects of BSCM. METHODS A total of 29 experts were invited to participate in a multistep Delphi consensus process on the surgical treatment of BSCM. RESULTS Twenty-two (76%) of 29 experts participated in the consensus. Qualitative analysis (content analysis) of an initial open-ended question survey resulted in 99 statements regarding surgical treatment of BSCM. By using a multistep survey with 100% participation in each round, consensus was reached on 52 (53%) of 99 statements. These were grouped into 4 categories: 1) definitions and reporting standards (7/14, 50%); 2) general and patient-related aspects (11/16, 69%); 3) anatomical-, timing of surgery–, and BSCM-related aspects (22/37, 59%); and 4) clinical situation–based decision-making (12/32, 38%). Among other things, a consensus was reached for surgical timing, handling of associated developmental venous anomalies, handling of postoperative BSCM remnants, assessment of specific anatomical BSCM localizations, and treatment decisions in typical clinical BSCM scenarios. CONCLUSIONS A summary of typical clinical scenarios and a catalog of various BSCM- and patient-related aspects that influence the surgical treatment decision have been defined, rated, and interpreted.