Table 2:

Imaging and treatment characteristics

Case	Age/Sex	Gad	Flow Voids	Initial Diagnosis	Negative DSA	Final Diagnosis	Loc^{^a}	Treat	Aminoff-Logue Score
Case	Age/Sex	Gad	Flow Voids	Initial Diagnosis	Negative DSA	Final Diagnosis	Loc^{^a}	Treat	Pre	Post
1	40/M	+	−	TM	2	SEAVF	T9	Surg	8	6
2	50/M	+	−	TM	2	SDAVF	L5	Endo	8	8
3	73/M	+	+	TM	1	SDAVF	L4	Endo	8	5
4	80/M	+	++	TM	2	SEAVF	L5	Endo	9	7
5	60/M		+	TM	1	SDAVF	T4	Endo	9	8
6^{^b}	56/F	+	+	TM	1	SEAVFs	L2	Endo	10	8
6^{^b}	56/F	+	+	TM	1	SEAVFs	L4	Endo	10	8
7	89/M		−	Tumor	1	SEAVF	S1	Endo	3	1
8	73/F	+	−	TM	1	SEAVF	L4	Endo	10	5
9	58/M	+	+	TM	1	PmAVF	T10	Surg	10	10
10	75/M	+	++	TM	1	SDAVF	T12	Endo	10	7
11	75/M	+	−	TM	3	SDAVF	L3	Surg	8	9
12	49/M	+	++	TM	6	SDAVF	S2	Endo	6	4
13	69/M		−	TM	2	SEAVF	L5	Endo	11	11
14	56/M	+	++	Syrinx	1	PmAVF	T8	Surg	5	1
15	66/F	+	−	TM	1	SDAVF	T10	Endo	11	7
16	71/M		+	TM	2	SEAVF	S1	None	10	None
17	61/M	+	−	NMO	1	SDAVF	T4	Surg	9	6
18	25/M	+	++	TM	1	SEAVF	T12	Surg	11	4

Note:—Endo indicates endovascular; Gad, spinal cord enhancement after gadolinium; Loc, lesion location; NMO, neuromyelitis optica; Pre, pretreatment; Post, posttreatment; Surg, surgery; TM, transverse myelitis; Treat, treatment.
↵a For the 2 PmAVFs, the indicated level corresponds to the feeding artery.
↵b Patient 6 had 2 separate SEAVFs treated in separate endovascular procedures.