Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig 1.
Algorithm of the study groups.
Tables
Group 1 Group 2 Occluded AVF (n = 7) Partial AVF (n = 6) P Value Deteriorating AVF (n = 6) Stationary AVF (n = 7) Improving AVF (n = 3) P Value Age 49.7 ± 13.5 49.3 ± 15.4 .96 47.8 ± 14.6 45.0 ± 8.7 54.7 ± 2.1 .46 Sex .56 .36 Men 1 (14) 2 (33) 0 (0) 2 (29) 1 (33) Women 6 (86) 4 (67) 6 (100) 5 (71) 2 (67) Location of dural AVF .78 Cavernous sinus 2 (29) 1 (17) 1 1 (17) 1 (14) 1 (33) Noncavernous sinus 5 (71) 5 (83) 5 (83) 6 (86) 2 (67) Type of dural AVF .55 I, IIa 6 (86) 3 (50) .27 4 (67) 6 (86) 3 (100) IIb, IIa+b, III–V 1 (14) 3 (50) 2 (33) 1 (14) 0 (0) Note.—Data are the number (percentage) or mean ± SD.
Group Before Treatment After Treatment P Value Occluded (n = 7) RI 0.56 ± 0.18 0.81 ± 0.08 .01 EDV (cm/s) 53 ± 28 15 ± 6 .016 PSV (cm/s) 110 ± 26 78 ± 18 .084 Flow (mL/min) 374 ± 230 141 ± 38 .053 Partial treatment (n = 6) RI 0.57 ± 0.11 0.69 ± 0.09 .11 EDV (cm/s) 44 ± 23 29 ± 19 .16 PSV (cm/s) 121 ± 55 91 ± 30 .11 Flow (mL/min) 563 ± 392 283 ± 228 .096 - TABLE 3:
Results of carotid duplex sonography at baseline and after follow-up in patients with dural AVF
Group Baseline Follow-Up P Value Deteriorating (n = 6) RI 0.69 ± 0.11 0.53 ± 0.15 .04 EDV (cm/s) 23 ± 13 51 ± 27 .02 PSV (cm/s) 58 ± 19 108 ± 37 .01 Flow (mL/min) 243 ± 98 549 ± 255 .02 Stationary (n = 7) RI 0.71 ± 0.14 0.72 ± 0.12 63 EDV (cm/s) 31 ± 24 30 ± 21 .85 PSV (cm/s) 96 ± 35 101 ± 46 .77 Flow (mL/min) 218 ± 136 192 ± 138 .7 Improving (n = 3) RI 0.65 ± 0.11 0.77 ± 0.11 .009 EDV (cm/s) 32 ± 25 16 ± 4 .3 PSV (cm/s) 87 ± 47 84 ± 35 .93 Flow (mL/min) 383 ± 301 147 ± 100 .18
