Evidence Hub

Curative Treatment of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations Combining Endovascular and Surgical Approaches Consecutively

Brauner R, Smajda S, Chauvet D, Aldea S, Escalard S, Désilles JP, Redjem H, Al Raaisi A et al.

World neurosurgery, 2025

46 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) pose a significant treatment challenge, with options including microsurgical resection, endovascular embolization, radiosurgery, or combinations thereof. We present our experience with a curative strategy combining complete endovascular treatment followed by microsurgical resection under the same anesthesia session, without relying on a hybrid operating room.

METHODS: We reviewed consecutive patients with AVM who underwent endovascular treatment and microsurgical resection in a single anesthesia session (COMBI-AVM protocol) from December 2017 to July 2022. Primary endpoints were angiographic AVM obliteration status and modified Rankin Scale score at last follow-up. AVMs were graded by the Spetzler-Martin (SM) system, comparing low-grade (SM I, SM II, SM III with nidus <3 cm) and high-grade (SM III with nidus ≥3 cm, SM IV, SM V) AVMs.

RESULTS: Of 46 patients with AVM, 34 had low-grade (73.9%) and 12 had high-grade (26.1%) AVMs. The protocol feasibility was 100%. Median anesthesia time was 8.7 hours (interquartile range, 7.6-10.6). Complete AVM removal was achieved in 45 patients (97.8%), with no recurrences at late (>6 months) follow-up in any of the 32 patients (71.1%) with available follow-up data. Good clinical outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2) were seen in 91.3% of patients. Disabling treatment-related complications occurred in 4 patients (8.6%), including 1 death (2.2%).

CONCLUSIONS: Combining maximal…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 46 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free