Back to Search Start Over

Effect of treatment period on outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain arteriovenous malformations: an international multicenter study

Authors :
Rafael Rodriguez-Mercado
Symeon Missios
Mohana Rao Patibandla
David Mathieu
Hideyuki Kano
Danilo Silva
Jason P. Sheehan
Robert M. Starke
John T. Pierce
Gene H. Barnett
John Y K Lee
Mahmoud Abbassy
Inga S. Grills
L. Dade Lunsford
Luis Almodovar
Caleb E Feliciano
Jamie Whitesell
Paul P. Huang
Douglas Kondziolka
Dale Ding
Source :
Journal of neurosurgery.
Publication Year :
2017

Abstract

OBJECTIVEThe role of and technique for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the management of arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) have evolved over the past four decades. The aim of this multicenter, retrospective cohort study was to compare the SRS outcomes of AVMs treated during different time periods.METHODSThe authors selected patients with AVMs who underwent single-session SRS at 8 different centers from 1988 to 2014 with follow-up ≥ 6 months. The SRS eras were categorized as early (1988–2000) or modern (2001–2014). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the baseline characteristics and outcomes of the early versus modern SRS eras. Favorable outcome was defined as AVM obliteration, no post-SRS hemorrhage, and no permanently symptomatic radiation-induced changes (RICs).RESULTSThe study cohort comprised 2248 patients with AVMs, including 1584 in the early and 664 in the modern SRS eras. AVMs in the early SRS era were significantly smaller (p < 0.001 for maximum diameter and volume), and they were treated with a significantly higher radiosurgical margin dose (p < 0.001). The obliteration rate was significantly higher in the early SRS era (65% vs 51%, p < 0.001), and earlier SRS treatment period was an independent predictor of obliteration in the multivariate analysis (p < 0.001). The rates of post-SRS hemorrhage and radiological, symptomatic, and permanent RICs were not significantly different between the two groups. Favorable outcome was achieved in a significantly higher proportion of patients in the early SRS era (61% vs 45%, p < 0.001), but the earlier SRS era was not statistically significant in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.470) with favorable outcome.CONCLUSIONSDespite considerable advances in SRS technology, refinement of AVM selection, and contemporary multimodality AVM treatment, the study failed to observe substantial improvements in SRS favorable outcomes or obliteration for patients with AVMs over time. Differences in baseline AVM characteristics and SRS treatment parameters may partially account for the significantly lower obliteration rates in the modern SRS era. However, improvements in patient selection and dose planning are necessary to optimize the utility of SRS in the contemporary management of AVMs.

Details

ISSN :
19330693
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of neurosurgery
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....dbe5596b066413047f75c620953376f4