Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR is seeking candidates for the AJNR Podcast Editor. Read the position description.

Research ArticleINTERVENTIONAL

Changing Clinical and Therapeutic Trends in Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Systematic Review

D. Cannizzaro, W. Brinjikji, S. Rammos, M.H. Murad and G. Lanzino
American Journal of Neuroradiology October 2015, 36 (10) 1905-1911; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4394
D. Cannizzaro
aFrom the Departments of Neurosurgery (D.C., G.L.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. Brinjikji
bRadiology (W.B.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. Rammos
dDepartment of Neurosurgery (S.R.), Arkansas Neuroscience Institute, Little Rock, Arkansas.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M.H. Murad
cCenter for Science of Healthcare Delivery (M.H.M.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G. Lanzino
aFrom the Departments of Neurosurgery (D.C., G.L.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas are characterized by a high hemorrhagic risk. We evaluated trends in outcomes and management of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas and performed a meta-analysis evaluating clinical and angiographic outcomes by treatment technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies on surgical and endovascular treatment of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas. We compared the proportion of patients undergoing endovascular, surgical, and combined endovascular/surgical management; the proportion of patients presenting with ruptured tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas; and proportion of patients with good neurologic outcome across 3 time periods: 1980–1995, 1996–2005, and 2006–2014. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis, evaluating the rates of occlusion, long-term good neurologic outcome, perioperative morbidity, and resolution of symptoms for the 3 treatment modalities.

RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies with 274 patients were included. The proportion of patients treated with surgical treatment alone decreased from 38.7% to 20.4% between 1980–1995 and 2006–2014. The proportion of patients treated with endovascular therapy alone increased from 16.1% to 48.0%. The proportion of patients presenting with ruptured tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas decreased from 64.4% to 43.6%. The rate of good neurologic outcome increased from 80.7% to 92.9%. Complete occlusion rates were highest for patients receiving multimodality treatment (84.0%; 95% CI, 72.0%–91.0%) and lowest for endovascular treatment (71.0%; 95% CI, 56.0%–83.0%; P < .01). Long-term good neurologic outcome was highest in the endovascular group (89.0%; 95% CI, 80.0%–95.0%) and lowest for the surgical group (73.0%; 95% CI, 51.0%–87.0%; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas are increasingly presenting with unruptured lesions, being treated endovascularly, and experiencing higher rates of good neurologic outcomes. Endovascular treatment was associated with superior neurologic outcomes but lower occlusion rates.

ABBREVIATIONS:

DAVF
dural arteriovenous fistula
TDAVF
tentorial dural arteriovenous fistula

Intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs) are abnormal direct shunts between the dural arteries and dural veins.1 The shunt is located in the intracranial dura mater with venous drainage directed to the dural venous sinuses or cortical veins. Dural arteriovenous fistulas account for 10%–15% of all intracranial vascular shunts.1,2 Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas (TDAVFs) constitute only 4% of DAVFs and are characterized by a high hemorrhagic risk. Because of this, these lesions are treated aggressively on diagnosis.3⇓–5

Traditionally, surgical resection was the only treatment available for these lesions. However, endovascular embolization, either alone or in combination with surgery, is increasingly used.6 Stereotactic radiosurgery is also increasingly used as an adjunct to surgical and endovascular treatment.7 We performed a systematic review of the literature on surgical and endovascular treatment of TDAVFs from 1980 to 2014. The purpose of our study was the following: 1) to determine whether there was a shift from primarily surgical treatments to endovascular and multimodality treatment during this time period, 2) to determine whether the proportion of patients presenting with ruptured TDAVFs during this time period has changed, 3) to determine whether the rate of good neurologic outcome has changed, and 4) to evaluate clinical and angiographic outcomes in endovascular, surgical, and combined treatments by performing a random-effects meta-analysis.

Materials and Methods

A comprehensive literature search of the data bases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid EMBASE) was designed and conducted by an experienced librarian with input from the authors. The key words “endovascular,” “catheterization,” “percutaneous,” “embolization,” “coil,” “cerebral veins,” “intracranial,” “arteriovenous fistula,” “surgery,” “DAVF,” “resection,” and “tentorial” were used in both “AND” and “OR” combinations. The search was limited to articles published from 1980 to June 2014 in the English language only. All studies reporting patients treated with surgery or endovascular therapy for TDAVFs were selected. Inclusion criteria were the following: 1) series of >5 patients, with available data on clinical and/or angiographic outcomes. Studies with fewer than 5 patients were included only if they were published before 1995. Two reviewers selected the included studies. For each study, we extracted the following information: patient presentation (ruptured or unruptured), treatment technique (endovascular, surgical, or combined), long-term good neurologic outcome, long-term neurologic morbidity, angiographic occlusion status at last follow-up, resolution of symptoms for unruptured TDAVFs, and year of publication. Good neurologic outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of ≤2. In cases in which a modified Rankin Scale score was not available, good neurologic outcome was determined if the study used terms such as “no morbidity” or “good recovery.”

The primary objective of this study was to determine the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients with endovascular, surgical, or multimodality treatment. The secondary objective was to determine trends in patient presentations, treatment type, and clinical outcome following treatment of TDAVFs. For this secondary objective, studies were divided into 3 periods: 1) studies published from 1995 and earlier, 2) studies published from 1996 to 2005, and 3) studies published from 2006 to 2014. For this secondary objective, we performed the following analyses: 1) the proportion of patients presenting with ruptured TDAVFs in each period; 2) the proportion of patients receiving endovascular, surgical, and combined treatments; and 3) the proportion of patients with good neurologic outcome.

Study Quality

We modified the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for case-control studies to assess the quality of the studies included in this meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa score is designed for use in case-control-type studies; however, because none of the studies included in our analysis were of this type, we assessed study quality on the basis of the following: 1) The study included all patients or consecutive patients versus a selected sample, 2) the angiographic and clinical follow-up was satisfactory, thus allowing ascertainment of all outcomes, 3) the case definition was adequate (ie, the location and presentation of the DAVF were clearly stated), 4) outcomes were clearly reported, and 5) the interventionalists/surgeons treating the patients were the same as those who assessed angiographic and clinical outcomes. High-quality studies were defined as those with ≥20 patients, high rates of clinical follow-up with clearly reported outcomes, and independent assessment of angiographic and clinical outcomes.

Statistical Analysis

All included studies were noncomparative. We estimated from each cohort the cumulative incidence (event rate) and 95% confidence interval for each outcome. Event rates for each intervention were pooled in a meta-analysis across studies by using the random-effects model.8 Anticipating heterogeneity between studies, we chose this model a priori because it incorporates within-study and between-study variances. We also extracted a 2 × 2 table for each studied outcome for interaction testing and calculated P values for the comparisons between endovascular and surgical groups, surgical and multimodality groups, and endovascular and multimodality groups. Heterogeneity of treatment effect across studies was evaluated by using the I2 statistic.9

Results

Literature Review

Studies included in our review are summarized in Table 1. Our literature search yielded 986 articles; 879 articles were excluded after reading the abstract alone, with a total of 107 articles reviewed. Of these, 78 were excluded for either not including TDAVFs in their patient population or not reporting patient presentation or angiographic outcomes. In total, 29 studies with 274 patients met our inclusion criteria. The search results are summarized in Fig 1.

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Literature search flow chart.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Study characteristics

Meta-Analysis Outcomes: All Patients

Meta-analysis outcomes are summarized in Table 2. Forest plots are provided as On-line Figs 1–5. The rates of complete occlusion at last follow-up were 71.0% (95% CI, 56.0%–83.0%) for the endovascular-only group, 81.0% (95% CI, 61.0%–92.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 84.0% (95% CI, 72.0%–91.0%) for the combined-treatment group. The combined-treatment group had a statistically significantly higher rate of complete occlusion (P < .01). The rate of long-term neurologic morbidity was 5.0% (95% CI, 2.0%–11.0%) for the endovascular group, 8.0% (95% CI, 2.0%–21.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 6.0% (95% CI, 2.0%–15.0%) for the combined-treatment group. There was no difference between groups in the rates of long-term neurologic morbidity. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 6.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–13.0%) for the endovascular group, 18.0% (95% CI, 8.0%–35.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 14.0% (95% CI, 8.0%–24.0%) for the combined-treatment group. Patients treated with endovascular therapy had significantly lower perioperative morbidity rates than those treated with surgery (P = .03) and combined treatments (P < .01). The long-term good neurologic outcome rates were 89.0% (95% CI, 80.0%–95.0%) for the endovascular group, 73.0% (95% CI, 51.0%–87.0% for the surgical group, and 87.0% (95% CI, 71.0%–94.0%) for the combined-treatment group. Long-term good neurologic outcome rates were significantly higher in the endovascular group than in the surgery group (P = .03).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Outcomes of random-effects meta-analysis

Meta-Analysis Outcomes: Patients with Unruptured TDAVFs

Meta-analysis outcomes are summarized in Table 2. Forest plots are provided as On-line Figs 1–5. The rates of complete occlusion at last follow-up were 76.0% (95% CI, 54.0%–89.0%) for the endovascular-only group, 89.0% (95% CI, 69.0%–97.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 78.0% (95% CI, 53.0%–92.0%) for the combined-treatment group. The rates of long-term neurologic morbidity were 10.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–27.0%) for the endovascular group, 11.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–31.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 10.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–28.0%) for the combined-treatment group. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 10.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–27.0%) for the endovascular group, 18.0% (95% CI, 5.0%–48.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 21.0% (95% CI, 8.0%–46.0%) for the combined-treatment group. The rates of resolution of symptoms were 82.0% (95% CI, 59.0%–94.0%) for the endovascular group, 50.0% (95% CI, 18.0%–82.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 73.0% (95% CI, 37.0%–92.0%) for the combined-treatment group. There were significantly higher rates of symptom resolution in the endovascular group compared with the surgical group (P = .03). The long-term good neurologic outcome rates were 95.0% (95% CI, 91.1%–99.0%) for the endovascular group, 56.0% (95% CI, 20.0%–86.0%) for the surgical group, and 88.0% (95% CI, 68.0%–96.0%) for the combined-treatment group, with significantly better outcomes in the endovascular compared with surgical group (P < .01) and the combined-treatment compared with the surgical group (P < .01).

Meta-Analysis Outcomes: Patients with Ruptured TDAVFs

Meta-analysis outcomes are summarized in Table 2. Forest plots are provided as On-line Figs 1–5. The rates of complete occlusion at last follow-up were 78.0% (95% CI, 61.0%–88.0%) for the endovascular-only group, 88.0% (95% CI, 63.0%–97.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 82.0% (95% CI, 62.0%–93.0%) for the combined-treatment group. The rates of long-term neurologic morbidity were 7.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–19.0%) for the endovascular group, 12.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–37.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 9.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–28.0%) for the combined-treatment group. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 7.0% (95% CI, 3.0%–19.0%) for the endovascular group, 20.0% (95% CI, 6.0%–49.0%) for the surgery-only group, and 21.0% (95% CI, 10.0%–38.0%) for the combined-treatment group. The long-term good neurologic outcome rates were 87.0% (95% CI, 71.0%–94.0%) for the endovascular group, 73.0% (95% CI, 44.0%–90.0%) for the surgical group, and 88.0% (95% CI, 71.0%–94.0%) for the combined-treatment group. There were no significant differences among groups for any of the outcomes.

Secondary Outcomes

The proportion of patients treated with surgical treatment alone decreased from 38.7% to 20.4% between 1980–1995 and 2006–2014. The proportion of patients treated with endovascular therapy alone increased from 16.1% to 48.0% (Fig 2). The proportion of patients presenting with ruptured TDAVFs decreased from 64.4% to 43.6% (Fig 3). The rate of good neurologic outcome increased from 80.7% to 92.9% (Fig 4).

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Treatment technique type by time period. E indicates endovascular; S, surgical; M, combined.

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Rate of good neurologic outcome by time period.

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

Proportion of patients presenting with ruptured TDAVFs by time period.

Discussion

The results of this study confirm that contemporary treatment of TDAVF leads to a high percentage of both angiographic cure and favorable clinical outcomes. Successful treatment is achieved uniformly among ruptured and unruptured lesions, with comparable low morbidity, among endovascular, surgical, and combined-treatment modalities. Endovascular and multimodality approaches appear to be associated with a higher rate of symptom resolution in patients with nonhemorrhagic presentation, compared with stand-alone surgical approaches. Furthermore, our study reveals a sustained shift from surgery toward an endovascular approach as the preferred treatment technique of TDAVF in the past 2 decades. Advances in the understanding of the pathologic anatomy of TDAVFs coupled with significant improvement in microcatheter and embolic material technology and microsurgical technique are reflected in the achievement of improved neurologic outcomes in this period. Finally, an increasing number of TDAVFs are now diagnosed and treated before they present with hemorrhage, presumably due to wide availability and improved resolution of noninvasive angiography and the recognition of venous hypertension as a prominent cause of neurologic morbidity.

Dural arteriovenous fistulas of the tentorium have been traditionally considered among the most likely to present with hemorrhage or aggressive nonhemorrhagic neurologic dysfunction. In their review of 337 DAVF cases in 1990, Awad et al10 found that 97% of TDAVFs presented with either hemorrhage or symptomatic venous hypertension. In fact, the overwhelming majority of patients with DAVFs who present with hemorrhage have TDAVFs.5 It is now recognized that the presence of retrograde leptomeningeal drainage, not DAVF location, is the major determining factor of the mode of clinical presentation, and TDAVFs are universally associated with retrograde leptomeningeal drainage.11 The natural history of symptomatic DAVF with retrograde leptomeningeal drainage is particularly unfavorable. In 1 study of 20 patients who received either no or partial treatment for DAVFs with retrograde leptomeningeal drainage, the annual mortality rate was calculated at 10.4% and the annual risk for hemorrhage or nonhemorrhagic neurologic deficits after the first presentation were 8.1% and 6.9%, respectively. Five patients in this series had DAVFs of the tentorium, of whom 3 died and 1 had moderate disability on follow-up.12 On the other hand, recent studies have shown that asymptomatic DAVFs with retrograde leptomeningeal drainage may have a relatively benign natural course. Careful inspection reveals that this may not necessarily be valid in the case of TDAVFs, as evidenced in a series of 17 asymptomatic patients, in which only 1 patient had a DAVF of the tentorium and who, in fact, presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage after partial treatment.13

Until recently, DAVFs of the tentorium were considered candidates only for surgical interruption in the form of microsurgical disconnection of the proximal leptomeningeal venous drainage.14 The introduction of ethylene-vinyl alcohol (Onyx; Covidien, Irvine, California), a permanent, nonadhesive, liquid embolic agent, has revolutionized DAVF treatment and may be the leading cause of the shift toward a predominantly endovascular treatment paradigm in TDAVFs. In transarterial DAVF Onyx embolization, a proximal plug is created around the distal tip of the microcatheter to produce sufficient proximal flow arrest and allow distal penetration of ethylene-vinyl alcohol into the proximal venous outlet while allowing retrograde occlusion of contributing arterial feeders. More recently, dual-lumen balloon microcatheters are used that allow the unopposed forward penetration of Onyx, without the time-consuming effort of plug formation, while concurrently decreasing the risk of premature proximal reflux.15 The posterior branch of the middle meningeal artery almost always provides arterial supply to a TDAVF and provides a natural direct access to the venous collector system of the fistula. Furthermore, the middle meningeal artery and its branches run a relatively straight course and are anchored on the dura, making failed microcatheter retrieval rare despite substantial Onyx reflux. Although proximal Onyx reflux may occur with a high margin of safety in the middle meningeal artery, reflux should not be allowed in proximity to the level of the foramen spinosum to avoid inadvertent compromise of the arterial supply to the trigeminal and facial nerves.16

Even though we have attempted to summarize data on all published series of treated TDAVFs, our study has certain limitations. The results of separate case series were published by multiple authors who reported independently assessed data and who determined different specific variables that are included in this article. However, the extracted data have been derived from a fairly homogeneous and strictly defined patient population. Furthermore, our study has publication bias, because patients who had either uneventful or poor outcomes may have been excluded from published results. Moreover, treatment modalities have varied during the time course of the published series; this variation makes standardization of treatment paradigms difficult. Last, uniform assessment and reporting of complications in a standardized fashion were lacking. On the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework, the quality of evidence (confidence in estimates) is very low because of imprecision, heterogeneity, and methodologic limitations of the included studies.17,18 Nevertheless, this meta-analysis provides useful data to share with patients and families when assessing the risks of treatment of TDAVFs and represents a benchmark against which future studies can be compared. With analysis of >270 patients, this is currently the largest study examining outcomes of surgical and endovascular treatment of TDAVFs, to our knowledge.

Conclusions

During the past 35 years, patients with TDAVFs have been increasingly presenting with unruptured lesions, receiving endovascular treatment, and experiencing higher rates of good neurologic outcomes. Endovascular treatment was associated with the best long-term neurologic outcomes but lower occlusion rates. Combined endovascular and surgical treatment was associated with high occlusion rates and low morbidity. Increasing use of Onyx may continue to shift the balance more and more toward increasing endovascular treatment as the sole mode of therapy.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Giuseppe Lanzino—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Covidien/ev3.* *Money paid to the institution.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Hiramatsu M,
    2. Sugiu K,
    3. Hishikawa T, et al
    . Epidemiology of dural arteriovenous fistula in Japan: analysis of Japanese Registry of Neuroendovascular Therapy (JR-NET2). Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2014;54:63–71
    CrossRef
  2. 2.↵
    1. Söderman M,
    2. Pavic L,
    3. Edner G, et al
    . Natural history of dural arteriovenous shunts. Stroke 2008;39:1735–39
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Byrne JV,
    2. Garcia M
    . Tentorial dural fistulas: endovascular management and description of the medial dural-tentorial branch of the superior cerebellar artery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1798–804
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Cha KC,
    2. Yeon JY,
    3. Kim GH, et al
    . Clinical and angiographic results of patients with dural arteriovenous fistula. J Clin Neurosci 2013;20:536–42
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Daniels DJ,
    2. Vellimana AK,
    3. Zipfel GJ, et al
    . Intracranial hemorrhage from dural arteriovenous fistulas: clinical features and outcome. Neurosurg Focus 2013;34:E15
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Zhou LF,
    2. Chen L,
    3. Song DL, et al
    . Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas. Surg Neurol 2007;67:472–81; discussion 481–82
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Yang HC,
    2. Kano H,
    3. Kondziolka D, et al
    . Stereotactic radiosurgery with or without embolization for intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas. Neurosurgery 2010;67:1276–83; discussion 1284–85
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. DerSimonian R,
    2. Laird N
    . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–88
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Higgins JP,
    2. Thompson SG,
    3. Deeks JJ, et al
    . Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557–60
    FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Awad IA,
    2. Little JR,
    3. Akarawi WP, et al
    . Intracranial dural arteriovenous malformations: factors predisposing to an aggressive neurological course. J Neurosurg 1990;72:839–50
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Davies MA,
    2. TerBrugge K,
    3. Willinsky R, et al
    . The validity of classification for the clinical presentation of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas. J Neurosurg 1996;85:830–37
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. van Dijk JM,
    2. terBrugge KG,
    3. Willinsky RA, et al
    . Clinical course of cranial dural arteriovenous fistulas with long-term persistent cortical venous reflux. Stroke 2002;33:1233–36
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Strom RG,
    2. Botros JA,
    3. Refai D, et al
    . Cranial dural arteriovenous fistulae: asymptomatic cortical venous drainage portends less aggressive clinical course. Neurosurgery 2009;64:241–47
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Thompson BG,
    2. Doppman JL,
    3. Oldfield EH
    . Treatment of cranial dural arteriovenous fistulae by interruption of leptomeningeal venous drainage. J Neurosurg 1994;80:617–23
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Rammos S,
    2. Bortolotti C,
    3. Lanzino G
    . Endovascular management of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2014;25:539–49
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Puffer RC,
    2. Daniels DJ,
    3. Kallmes DF, et al
    . Curative Onyx embolization of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas. Neurosurg Focus 2012;32:E4
    PubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Balshem H,
    2. Helfand M,
    3. Schünemann HJ, et al
    . GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401–06
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Guyatt GH,
    2. Oxman AD,
    3. Kunz R, et al
    . GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:1283–93
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.
    1. Abud TG,
    2. Nguyen A,
    3. Saint-Maurice JP, et al
    . The use of Onyx in different types of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistula. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:2185–91
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.
    1. Bret P,
    2. Salzmann M,
    3. Bascoulergue Y, et al
    . Dural arteriovenous fistula of the posterior fossa draining into the spinal medullary veins: an unusual cause of myelopathy—case report. Neurosurgery 1994;35:965–68; discussion 968–99
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.
    1. Fardoun R,
    2. Adam Y,
    3. Mercier P, et al
    . Tentorial arteriovenous malformation presenting as an intracerebral hematoma: case report. J Neurosurg 1981;55:976–78
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.
    1. Grisoli F,
    2. Vincentelli F,
    3. Fuchs S, et al
    . Surgical treatment of tentorial arteriovenous malformations draining into the subarachnoid space: report of four cases. J Neurosurg 1984;60:1059–66
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.
    1. Gross BA,
    2. Du R
    . Surgical treatment of high grade dural arteriovenous fistulae. J Clin Neurosci 2013;20:1527–32
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.
    1. Hatano T,
    2. Bozinov O,
    3. Burkhardt JK, et al
    . Surgical treatment of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulae located around the tentorial incisura. Neurosurg Rev 2013;36:429–35
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.
    1. Huang Q,
    2. Xu Y,
    3. Hong B, et al
    . Use of Onyx in the management of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulae. Neurosurgery 2009;65:287–92; discussion 292–93
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.
    1. Ito M,
    2. Sonokawa T,
    3. Mishina H, et al
    . Reversible dural arteriovenous malformation-induced venous ischemia as a cause of dementia: treatment by surgical occlusion of draining dural sinus—case report. Neurosurgery 1995;37:1187–91; discussion 1191–92
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.
    1. Kakarla UK,
    2. Deshmukh VR,
    3. Zabramski JM, et al
    . Surgical treatment of high-risk intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae: clinical outcomes and avoidance of complications. Neurosurgery 2007;61:447–57; discussion 457–59
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.
    1. Lawton MT,
    2. Sanchez-Mejia RO,
    3. Pham D, et al
    . Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulae: operative strategies and microsurgical results for six types. Neurosurgery 2008;62(3 suppl 1):110–24
    CrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.
    1. Lewis AI,
    2. Tomsick TA,
    3. Tew JM Jr.
    . Management of tentorial dural arteriovenous malformations: transarterial embolization combined with stereotactic radiation or surgery. J Neurosurg 1994;81:851–59
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.
    1. Lewis AI,
    2. Rosenblatt SS,
    3. Tew JM Jr.
    . Surgical management of deep-seated dural arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1997;87:198–206
    CrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.
    1. Liu C,
    2. Xu B,
    3. Song D, et al
    . Clinical approach of using Onyx via transarterial access in treating tentorial dural arteriovenous fistula. Neurol Res 2014;36:983–91
    CrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.
    1. Lucas Cde P,
    2. Prandini MN,
    3. Caldas JG
    . Analysis of the best therapeutic alternative for intracranial dural arteriovenous malformations. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2005;63:605–13
    CrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.
    1. Lucas CP,
    2. Zabramski JM,
    3. Spetzler RF, et al
    . Treatment for intracranial dural arteriovenous malformations: a meta-analysis from the English language literature. Neurosurgery 1997;40:1119–30; discussion 1130–32
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.
    1. Natarajan SK,
    2. Ghodke B,
    3. Kim LJ, et al
    . Multimodality treatment of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas in the Onyx era: a single center experience. World Neurosurg 2010;73:365–79
    CrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.
    1. Ott D,
    2. Bien S,
    3. Krasznai L
    . Embolization of a tentorial dural arterio-venous fistula presenting as atypical trigeminal neuralgia. Headache 1993;33:503–08
    CrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.
    1. Pandey P,
    2. Steinberg GK,
    3. Westbroek EM, et al
    . Intraoperative angiography for cranial dural arteriovenous fistula. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1091–95
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Chiras J,
    3. Meder JF, et al
    . Dural arteriovenous-fistulas of the posterior fossa draining into subarachnoid veins. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1992;13:315–23
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.
    1. Piippo A,
    2. Niemela M,
    3. van Popta J, et al
    . Characteristics and long-term outcome of 251 patients with dural arteriovenous fistulas in a defined population. J Neurosurg 2013;118:923–34
    CrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.
    1. Rabinov JD,
    2. Yoo AJ,
    3. Ogilvy CS, et al
    . ONYX versus n-BCA for embolization of cranial dural arteriovenous fistulas. J Neurointerv Surg 2013;5:306–10
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.
    1. Tomak PR,
    2. Cloft HJ,
    3. Kaga A, et al
    . Evolution of the management of tentorial dural arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2003;52:750–60; discussion 760–62
    CrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.
    1. van Lindert E,
    2. Hassler W,
    3. Kühne D, et al
    . Combined endovascular-microsurgical treatment of tentorial-incisural dural arteriovenous malformations: report of five cases. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2000;43:138–43
    CrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.
    1. van Rooij WJ,
    2. Sluzewski M,
    3. Beute GN
    . Tentorial artery embolization in tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas. Neuroradiology 2006;48:737–43
    CrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.
    1. Wachter D,
    2. Hans F,
    3. Psychogios MN, et al
    . Microsurgery can cure most intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae of the sinus and non-sinus type. Neurosurg Rev 2011;34:337–45; discussion 345
    CrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.
    1. Wajnberg E,
    2. Spilberg G,
    3. Rezende MT, et al
    . Endovascular treatment of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulae. Interv Neuroradiol 2012;18:60–68
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received January 29, 2015.
  • Accepted after revision March 5, 2015.
  • © 2015 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 36 (10)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 36, Issue 10
1 Oct 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Changing Clinical and Therapeutic Trends in Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Systematic Review
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
D. Cannizzaro, W. Brinjikji, S. Rammos, M.H. Murad, G. Lanzino
Changing Clinical and Therapeutic Trends in Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Systematic Review
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2015, 36 (10) 1905-1911; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4394

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Changing Clinical and Therapeutic Trends in Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Systematic Review
D. Cannizzaro, W. Brinjikji, S. Rammos, M.H. Murad, G. Lanzino
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2015, 36 (10) 1905-1911; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4394
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Dural arteriovenous fistula research and management in China (DREAM-INI): initial characterization and patient cohort outcomes
  • Rapid ventricular pacing for flow control during transarterial Onyx embolization of tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas
  • Crossref (32)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Endovascular and surgical approaches of ethmoidal dural fistulas: a multicenter experience and a literature review
    D. Cannizzaro, S. Peschillo, M. Cenzato, G. Pero, M.C. Resta, G. Guidetti, N. Burdi, M. Piccirilli, A. Santoro, G. Lanzino
    Neurosurgical Review 2018 41 2
  • A hemorrhagic complication after Onyx embolization of a tentorial dural arteriovenous fistula: A caution about subdural extension with pial arterial supply
    Kenichi Sato, Yasushi Matsumoto, Hidenori Endo, Teiji Tominaga
    Interventional Neuroradiology 2017 23 3
  • Medial Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Embolization: Single Experience with Embolic Liquid Polymer SQUID and Review of the Literature
    Andrea Gioppo, Giuseppe Faragò, Valentina Caldiera, Luigi Caputi, Alberto Cusin, Elisa Ciceri
    World Neurosurgery 2017 107
  • Consortium for Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Outcomes Research (CONDOR): rationale, design, and initial characterization of patient cohort
    Ridhima Guniganti, Enrico Giordan, Ching-Jen Chen, Isaac Josh Abecassis, Michael R. Levitt, Andrew Durnford, Jessica Smith, Edgar A. Samaniego, Colin P. Derdeyn, Amanda Kwasnicki, Ali Alaraj, Adriaan R. E. Potgieser, Samir Sur, Stephanie H. Chen, Yoshiteru Tada, Ethan Winkler, Ryan R. L. Phelps, Pui Man Rosalind Lai, Rose Du, Adib Abla, Junichiro Satomi, Robert M. Starke, J. Marc C. van Dijk, Sepideh Amin-Hanjani, Minako Hayakawa, Bradley A. Gross, W. Christopher Fox, Diederik Bulters, Louis J. Kim, Jason Sheehan, Giuseppe Lanzino, Jay F. Piccirillo, Akash P. Kansagra, Gregory J. Zipfel, _ _, _ _, Gregory J. Zipfel, Akash P. Kansagra, Ridhima Guniganti, Jay F. Piccirillo, Hari Raman, Kim Lipsey, Giuseppe Lanzino, Enrico Giordan, Waleed Brinjikji, Roanna Vine, Harry J. Cloft, David F. Kallmes, Bruce E. Pollock, Michael J. Link, Jason Sheehan, Ching-Jen Chen, Mohana Rao Patibandla, Dale Ding, Thomas Buell, Gabriella Paisan, Louis J. Kim, Michael R. Levitt, Isaac Josh Abecassis, R. Michael Meyer, Cory Kelly, Diederik Bulters, Andrew Durnford, Jonathan Duffill, Adam Ditchfield, John Millar, Jason Macdonald, W. Christopher Fox, Adam J. Polifka, Dimitri Laurent, Brian Hoh, Jessica Smith, Ashley Lockerman, Bradley A. Gross, L. Dade Lunsford, Brian T. Jankowitz, Minako Hayakawa, Colin P. Derdeyn, Edgar A. Samaniego, Santiago Ortega Gutierrez, David Hasan, Jorge A. Roa, James Rossen, Waldo Guerrero, Allen McGruder, Sepideh Amin-Hanjani, Ali Alaraj, Amanda Kwasnicki, Fady T. Charbel, Victor A. Aletich, Linda Rose-Finnell, J. Marc C. van Dijk, Adriaan R. E. Potgieser, Robert M. Starke, Eric C. Peterson, Dileep R. Yavagal, Samir Sur, Stephanie H. Chen, Junichiro Satomi, Yoshiteru Tada, Yasuhisa Kanematsu, Nobuaki Yamamoto, Tomoya Kinouchi, Masaaki Korai, Izumi Yamaguchi, Yuki Yamamoto, Adib Abla, Ethan Winkler, Ryan R. L. Phelps, Michael Lawton, Martin Rutkowski, Rose Du, Pui Man Rosalind Lai, M. Ali Aziz-Sultan, Nirav Patel, Kai U. Frerichs
    Journal of Neurosurgery 2022 136 4
  • Complication rate, cure rate, and long-term outcomes of microsurgery for intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae: a multicenter series and systematic review
    Taku Sugiyama, Naoki Nakayama, Satoshi Ushikoshi, Ken Kazumata, Michinari Okamoto, Masaki Ito, Toshiya Osanai, Yusuke Shimoda, Kazuki Uchida, Daisuke Shimbo, Yasuhiro Ito, Katsuyuki Asaoka, Toshitaka Nakamura, Satoshi Kuroda, Kiyohiro Houkin
    Neurosurgical Review 2021 44 1
  • Recurrent Secondary Trigeminal Neuralgia Caused by Obliterated Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Cured with Surgical Resection: Case Report and Literature Review
    Lidan Jiang, Meng Qi, Ming Ye, Meng Li, Yuhai Bao, Jiantao Liang
    World Neurosurgery 2019 121
  • Microsurgical Findings of Pial Arterial Feeders in Intracranial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulae: A Case Series
    Michinari Okamoto, Taku Sugiyama, Naoki Nakayama, Satoshi Ushikoshi, Ken Kazumata, Toshiya Osanai, Kikutaro Tokairin, Yusuke Shimoda, Kiyohiro Houkin
    Operative Neurosurgery 2020 19 6
  • The oculomotor-tentorial triangle. Part 2: a microsurgical workspace for vascular lesions in the crural and ambient cisterns
    Justin R. Mascitelli, Sirin Gandhi, Ali Tayebi Meybodi, Michael T. Lawton
    Journal of Neurosurgery 2019 130 5
  • Analysis of the Pial Arterial Supply as a Cause of Intraprocedural Hemorrhage During Transarterial Liquid Embolization of Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas
    Naoko Miyamoto, Isao Naito
    World Neurosurgery 2022 163
  • Endovascular Treatment of Medial Tentorial Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Through the Dural Branch of the Pial Artery
    Chan-Lin Chu, Yu-Cheng Chu, Chee-Tat Lam, Tsong-Hai Lee, Shih-Chao Chien, Chih-Hua Yeh, Yi-Ming Wu, Ho-Fai Wong
    Frontiers in Neurology 2021 12

More in this TOC Section

  • SAVE vs. Solumbra Techniques for Thrombectomy
  • Contrast-Induced Encephalopathy after NeuroIR
  • CT Perfusion&Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke
Show more Interventional

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • AJNR Awards
  • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
  • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Photon-Counting CT
  • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire