Surgical management of dural arteriovenous fistulas with transosseous arterial feeders involving the jugular bulb

Dural arteriovenous fistulas located in the vicinity of the jugular foramen are complex vascular malformations and belong to the most challenging skull base lesions to treat. The authors comprehensively analyze multiple features in a series of dural arteriovenous fistulas with transosseous arterial feeders involving the jugular bulb. Four patients who underwent surgery via the transcondylar approach to treat dural arteriovenous fistulas around the jugular foramen were retrospectively reviewed. Previously, endovascular treatment was attempted in all patients. The success of the surgical treatment was examined with postoperative angiography. Complete obliteration of the dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs) was achieved in three patients, and significant flow reduction in one individual. All patients had a good postoperative outcome, and only one experienced mild hypoglossal nerve palsy. Despite extensive bone drilling, an occipitocervical fusion was necessary in only one patient with bilateral lesions. The use of an individually tailored transcondylar approach to treat dural arteriovenous fistulas at the region of the jugular foramen is most effective. This approach allows for complete obliteration of the connecting arterial feeders, and removal of bony structures containing pathological vessels

Microsurgery can cure most intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae of the sinus and non-sinus type

There is consensus that intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae (dAVF) with direct (non-sinus-type) or indirect (sinus-type) retrograde filling of a leptomeningeal vein should be treated due to the high risk of neurological deficits and hemorrhage. No consensus exists on treatment modality (surgery and/or embolization) and, if surgery is performed, on the best surgical strategy. This series aims to evaluate the role of surgery in the management of aggressive dAVFs. Forty-two patients underwent surgery. Opening and packing the sinus with thrombogenic material was performed in 9 of the 12 sinus-type dAVFs. In two sinus-type fistulae of the cavernous sinus and 1 of the torcular, microsurgery was used as prerequisite for subsequent embolization by providing access to the sinus. In the 30 non-sinus-type dAVFs, surgery consisted of interruption of the draining vein at the intradural entry point. In 41 patients undergoing 43 operations, elimination of the dAVF was achieved (97.6%). In one case, a minimal venous drainage persisted after surgery. The transient surgical morbidity was 11.9% (n = 5) and the permanent surgical morbidity 7.1% (n = 3). Our surgical strategy was to focus on the arterialized leptomeningeal vein in the non-sinus-type and on the arterialized sinus segment in the sinus-type dAVFs allowing us to obliterate all but one dAVF with a low morbidity rate. We therefore propose that microsurgery should be considered early in the treatment of both types of aggressive dAVFs. In selected cases of cavernous sinus dAVFs, the role of microsurgery is reduced to that of an adjunct to endovascular therapy

The unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score A multidisciplinary consensus

Objective: We endeavored to develop an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment score (UIATS) model that includes and quantifies key factors involved in clinical decision-making in the management of UIAs and to assess agreement for this model among specialists in UIA management and research. Methods: An international multidisciplinary (neurosurgery, neuroradiology, neurology, clinical epidemiology) group of 69 specialists was convened to develop and validate the UIATS model using a Delphi consensus. For internal (39 panel members involved in identification of relevant features) and external validation (30 independent external reviewers), 30 selected UIA cases were used to analyze agreement with UIATS management recommendations based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 indicating strong agreement). Interrater agreement (IRA) was assessed with standardized coefficients of dispersion (v(r)*) (v(r)* 5 0 indicating excellent agreement and v(r)* = 1 indicating poor agreement). Results: The UIATS accounts for 29 key factors in UIA management. Agreement with UIATS (mean Likert scores) was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.3) per reviewer for both reviewer cohorts; agreement per case was 4.3 (95% CI 4.1-4.4) for panel members and 4.5 (95% CI 4.3-4.6) for external reviewers (p = 0.017). Mean Likert scores were 4.2 (95% CI 4.1-4.3) for interventional reviewers (n = 56) and 4.1 (95% CI 3.9-4.4) for noninterventional reviewers (n = 12) (p = 0.290). Overall IRA (v(r)*) for both cohorts was 0.026 (95% CI 0.019-0.033). Conclusions: This novel UIA decision guidance study captures an excellent consensus among highly informed individuals on UIA management, irrespective of their underlying specialty. Clinicians can use the UIATS as a comprehensive mechanism for indicating how a large group of specialists might manage an individual patient with a UIA.Peer reviewe