Neurosurgical versus endovascular treatment of craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas: a multicenter cohort study of 97 patients
Keisuke Takai, Toshiki Endo, Toshitaka Seki, Tomoo Inoue, Izumi Koyanagi, Takafumi Mitsuhara, _ _, _ _, Keisuke Ito, Motoyuki Iwasaki, Hisaaki Uchikado, Daisuke Umebayashi, Munehiro Otsuka, Tatsuya Ohtonari, Junpei Oda, Hiroto Kageyama, Ryu Kurokawa, Satoshi Koizumi, Taku Sugawara, Yasuhiro Takeshima, Yoshitaka Nagashima, Misao Nishikawa, Masashi Fujimoto, Fumiaki Honda, Seishi Matsui, Yoshihisa Matsumoto, Yasuyuki Miyoshi, Hidetoshi Murata, Takao Yasuhara, Hitoshi Yamahata, Shinji Yamamoto, Yu Yamamoto
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Craniocervical junction (CCJ) arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are treated using neurosurgical or endovascular options; however, there is still no consensus on the safest and most effective treatment. The present study compared the treatment results of neurosurgical and endovascular procedures for CCJ AVFs, specifically regarding retreatment, complications, and outcomes. METHODS: This was a multicenter cohort study authorized by the Neurospinal Society of Japan. Data on consecutive patients with CCJ AVFs who underwent neurosurgical or endovascular treatment between 2009 and 2019 at 29 centers were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the retreatment rate by procedure. Secondary endpoints were the overall complication rate, the ischemic complication rate, the mortality rate, posttreatment changes in the neurological status, independent risk factors for retreatment, and poor outcomes. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients underwent neurosurgical (78 patients) or endovascular (19 patients) treatment. Retreatment rates were 2.6% (2/78 patients) in the neurosurgery group and 63% (12/19 patients) in the endovascular group (p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were 22% and 42% in the neurosurgery and endovascular groups, respectively (p = 0.084). Ischemic complication rates were 7.7% and 26% in the neurosurgery and endovascular groups, respectively (p = 0.037). Ischemic complications included 8 spinal infarctions, 2 brainstem infarctions, and 1 cerebellar infarction, which resulted in permanent neurological deficits. Mortality rates were 2.6% and 0% in the neurosurgery and endovascular groups, respectively (p > 0.99). Two patients died of systemic complications. The percentages of patients with improved modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores were 60% and 37% in the neurosurgery and endovascular groups, respectively, with a median follow-up of 23 months (p = 0.043). Multivariate analysis identified endovascular treatment as an independent risk factor associated with retreatment (OR 54, 95% CI 9.9-300; p < 0.001). Independent risk factors associated with poor outcomes (a postoperative mRS score of 3 or greater) were a pretreatment mRS score of 3 or greater (OR 13, 95% CI 2.7-62; p = 0.001) and complications (OR 5.8; 95% CI 1.3-26; p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Neurosurgical treatment was more effective and safer than endovascular treatment for patients with CCJ AVFs because of lower retreatment and ischemic complication rates and better outcomes.