Diagnosis and evaluation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations

Andrew Conger, Charles Kulwin, Michael T. Lawton, Aaron Cohen-Gadol

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Ideal management of intracranial arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) remains poorly defined. Decisions regarding management of AVMs are based on the expected natural history of the lesion and risk prediction for peritreatment morbidity. Microsurgical resection, stereotactic radiosurgery, and endovascular embolization alone or in combination are all viable treatment options, each with different risks. The authors attempt to clarify the existing literature′s understanding of the natural history of intracranial AVMs, and risk-assessment grading scales for each of the three treatment modalities. Methods: The authors conducted a literature review of the existing AVM natural history studies and studies that clarify the utility of existing grading scales available for the assessment of peritreatment risk for all three treatment modalities. Results: The authors systematically outline the diagnosis and evaluation of patients with intracranial AVMs and clarify estimation of the expected natural history and predicted risk of treatment for intracranial AVMs. Conclusion: AVMs are a heterogenous pathology with three different options for treatment. Accurate assessment of risk of observation and risk of treatment is essential for achieving the best outcome for each patient.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number76
JournalSurgical Neurology International
Volume6
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Intracranial Arteriovenous Malformations
Arteriovenous Malformations
Natural History
Therapeutics
Radiosurgery
Observation
Pathology
Morbidity

Keywords

  • Complications
  • intracranial arteriovenous malformation
  • microsurgical resection
  • technique

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Diagnosis and evaluation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations. / Conger, Andrew; Kulwin, Charles; Lawton, Michael T.; Cohen-Gadol, Aaron.

In: Surgical Neurology International, Vol. 6, No. 1, 76, 01.01.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Conger, Andrew ; Kulwin, Charles ; Lawton, Michael T. ; Cohen-Gadol, Aaron. / Diagnosis and evaluation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations. In: Surgical Neurology International. 2015 ; Vol. 6, No. 1.
@article{4a5e3e3f4634422f8f69bc3630d6abf2,
title = "Diagnosis and evaluation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations",
abstract = "Background: Ideal management of intracranial arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) remains poorly defined. Decisions regarding management of AVMs are based on the expected natural history of the lesion and risk prediction for peritreatment morbidity. Microsurgical resection, stereotactic radiosurgery, and endovascular embolization alone or in combination are all viable treatment options, each with different risks. The authors attempt to clarify the existing literature′s understanding of the natural history of intracranial AVMs, and risk-assessment grading scales for each of the three treatment modalities. Methods: The authors conducted a literature review of the existing AVM natural history studies and studies that clarify the utility of existing grading scales available for the assessment of peritreatment risk for all three treatment modalities. Results: The authors systematically outline the diagnosis and evaluation of patients with intracranial AVMs and clarify estimation of the expected natural history and predicted risk of treatment for intracranial AVMs. Conclusion: AVMs are a heterogenous pathology with three different options for treatment. Accurate assessment of risk of observation and risk of treatment is essential for achieving the best outcome for each patient.",
keywords = "Complications, intracranial arteriovenous malformation, microsurgical resection, technique",
author = "Andrew Conger and Charles Kulwin and Lawton, {Michael T.} and Aaron Cohen-Gadol",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4103/2152-7806.156866",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
journal = "Surgical Neurology International",
issn = "2152-7806",
publisher = "Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnosis and evaluation of intracranial arteriovenous malformations

AU - Conger, Andrew

AU - Kulwin, Charles

AU - Lawton, Michael T.

AU - Cohen-Gadol, Aaron

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Background: Ideal management of intracranial arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) remains poorly defined. Decisions regarding management of AVMs are based on the expected natural history of the lesion and risk prediction for peritreatment morbidity. Microsurgical resection, stereotactic radiosurgery, and endovascular embolization alone or in combination are all viable treatment options, each with different risks. The authors attempt to clarify the existing literature′s understanding of the natural history of intracranial AVMs, and risk-assessment grading scales for each of the three treatment modalities. Methods: The authors conducted a literature review of the existing AVM natural history studies and studies that clarify the utility of existing grading scales available for the assessment of peritreatment risk for all three treatment modalities. Results: The authors systematically outline the diagnosis and evaluation of patients with intracranial AVMs and clarify estimation of the expected natural history and predicted risk of treatment for intracranial AVMs. Conclusion: AVMs are a heterogenous pathology with three different options for treatment. Accurate assessment of risk of observation and risk of treatment is essential for achieving the best outcome for each patient.

AB - Background: Ideal management of intracranial arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) remains poorly defined. Decisions regarding management of AVMs are based on the expected natural history of the lesion and risk prediction for peritreatment morbidity. Microsurgical resection, stereotactic radiosurgery, and endovascular embolization alone or in combination are all viable treatment options, each with different risks. The authors attempt to clarify the existing literature′s understanding of the natural history of intracranial AVMs, and risk-assessment grading scales for each of the three treatment modalities. Methods: The authors conducted a literature review of the existing AVM natural history studies and studies that clarify the utility of existing grading scales available for the assessment of peritreatment risk for all three treatment modalities. Results: The authors systematically outline the diagnosis and evaluation of patients with intracranial AVMs and clarify estimation of the expected natural history and predicted risk of treatment for intracranial AVMs. Conclusion: AVMs are a heterogenous pathology with three different options for treatment. Accurate assessment of risk of observation and risk of treatment is essential for achieving the best outcome for each patient.

KW - Complications

KW - intracranial arteriovenous malformation

KW - microsurgical resection

KW - technique

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028748390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028748390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4103/2152-7806.156866

DO - 10.4103/2152-7806.156866

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85028748390

VL - 6

JO - Surgical Neurology International

JF - Surgical Neurology International

SN - 2152-7806

IS - 1

M1 - 76

ER -