Clinical features, treatment strategies and outcomes of craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas: a cohort study of 193 patients

Abstract

BackgroundCraniocervical junction (CCJ) arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are rare. The current treatment strategies for AVFs with different angioarchitecture need to be clarified. The present study aimed to analyse the correlation between angioarchitecture and clinical characteristics, share our experience in treating this disease and identify risk factors associated with subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) and poor outcomes.MethodsA total of 198 consecutive patients with CCJ AVFs from our neurosurgical centre were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were grouped according to their clinical manifestations, and their baseline clinical characteristics, angioarchitecture, treatment strategies and outcomes were summarised.ResultsThe patients’ median age was 56 years (IQR 47–62 years). The majority of patients were men with 166 (83.8%) patients. The most common clinical manifestation was SAH (52.0%), followed by venous hypertensive myelopathy (VHM) (45.5%). The most common CCJ AVFs type was dural AVF, with 132 (63.5%) fistulas. The most frequent fistula location was C-1 (68.7%) and dural branch of vertebral artery (70.2%) was the most involved arterial feeders for fistulas. The most common direction of venous drainage was descending intradural drainage (40.9%), followed by ascending intradural drainage (36.5%). Microsurgery was the most common treatment strategy applied for 151 (76.3%) patients, 15 (7.6%) patients were treated with interventional embolisation only, and 27 (13.6%) received both interventional embolisation and microsurgical treatment. The learning curve for microsurgery only was analysed by cumulative summation method, and the turning point was the 70th case, and blood loss in post-group was lower than that in pre-group (p=0.034). At the last follow-up, there were 155 (78.3%) patients with favourable outcomes (modified Rankin Scale(mRS)<3). Age≥56 (OR 2.038, 95% CI 1.039 to 3.998, p=0.038), VHM as the clinical manifestation (OR 4.102, 95% CI 2.108 to 7.982, p<0.001) and pretreatment mRS≥3 (OR 3.127, 95% CI 1.617 to 6.047, p<0.001) were significantly associated with poor outcomes.ConclusionThe arterial feeders and direction of the venous drainage were important factors in the clinical presentations. The location of fistula and drainage vein was essential for choosing different treatment strategies. Older age, VHM onset and poor pretreatment functional status predicted poor outcomes.

Estimation of the rupture point of the craniovertebral junction intradural arteriovenous fistula with vessel wall magnetic resonance image and its pathological findings: A case report

“…The risks of hemorrhage include ascending drainage, varicose veins, aneurysms, radicular AVF, intramedullary descending drainage, dural branches of vertebral arteries, and epidural drainage. [ 7 , 10 ] Our case had ascending drainage, varices, and intramedullary ascending drainage, and variceal structures were confirmed by preoperative images, and the intraoperative diagnosis was radicular AVF, suggesting that the lesion was at high risk for bleeding. Treatment includes direct surgery only in 35% of cases and combined treatment with direct surgery and endovascular treatment in 29%, with more than 60% of cases including direct surgery.…”