Lumbar spinal stenosis is a degenerative process that is extremely frequent in today’s aging population. It can result in impingement on the nerves of the cauda equina or on the thecal sac itself, and lead to debilitating symptoms such as severe leg pain, or restriction in the perimeter of ambulation, both resulting in dependency in daily activities. The impact of the disease is global and includes financial repercussions because of its involvement in the active work force group. Risk factors for the disease include some comorbidities such as obesity or smoking, daily habits such as an active lifestyle, but also genetic factors that are not completely elucidated yet. The diagnosis of lumbar stenosis can be difficult, and involves a combination of radiological and clinical findings. Treatment ranges from conservative measures with physical therapy and core strengthening, to steroid injections in the facet joints or epidural space, to a more radical solution with surgical decompression. The evidence available in the literature regarding the causes, diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spine stenosis can be confusing, as no level I recommendations can be provided yet based on current data. The aim of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive and updated summary to the reader addressing the multiple aspects of this disease.

OBJECTIVEEndovascular embolization has been established as an adjuvant treatment strategy for brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). A growing body of literature has discussed curative embolization for select lesions. The transition of endovascular embolization from an adjunctive to a definitive treatment modality remains controversial. Here, the authors reviewed the literature to assess the lesional characteristics, technical factors, and angiographic and clinical outcomes of endovascular embolization of AVMs with intent to cure.METHODSElectronic databases—Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed—were searched for studies in which there was evidence of AVMs treated using endovascular embolization with intent to cure. The primary outcomes of interest were angiographic obliteration immediately postembolization and at follow-up. The secondary outcomes of interest were complication rates. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate rates and means.RESULTSFifteen studies with 597 patients and 598 AVMs treated with intent-to-cure embolization were included in this analysis. Thirty-four percent of AVMs were Spetzler-Martin grade III. Complete obliteration immediately postembolization was reported in 58.3% of AVMs that had complete treatment and in 45.8% of AVMs in the entire patient cohort. The overall clinical complication rate was 24.1%. The most common complication was hemorrhage, occurring in 9.7% of patients. Procedure-related mortality was 1.5%.CONCLUSIONSWhile endovascular embolization with intent to cure can be an option for select AVMs, the reported complication rates appear to be increased compared with those in studies in which adjunctive embolization was the goal. Given the high complication rate related to a primary embolization approach, the risks and benefits of such a treatment strategy should be discussed among a multidisciplinary team. Curative embolization of AVMs should be considered an unanticipated benefit of such therapy rather than a goal.

No abstract

No abstract