Filipe Virgilio Ribeiro , Rudolfh Batista Arend , Bruno Zilli Peroni , Helvécio Neves Feitosa Filho , Maria Fernanda P. Santana , Leonardo Januario Campos Cardoso , Leandro Vieira Lessa , André Nishizima , Marcelo Porto Sousa , Alex Roman
{"title":"Microsurgical approach versus endovascular treatment of craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis","authors":"Filipe Virgilio Ribeiro , Rudolfh Batista Arend , Bruno Zilli Peroni , Helvécio Neves Feitosa Filho , Maria Fernanda P. Santana , Leonardo Januario Campos Cardoso , Leandro Vieira Lessa , André Nishizima , Marcelo Porto Sousa , Alex Roman","doi":"10.1016/j.neuchi.2025.101729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas (CCJ AVFs) are rare and complex vascular lesions that pose significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Despite advances in neuroimaging, optimal treatment strategies remain controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of microsurgical versus endovascular approaches for treating CCJ AVFs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was conducted up to March 2024. Studies were included if they reported outcomes of microsurgical or endovascular treatment for CCJ AVFs, including neurological improvement, complete obliteration, recurrence, and complications. Data were synthesized using a random-effects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Seven studies with 451 patients were included (microsurgery: n = 348; endovascular: n = 103). Microsurgery showed no statistically significant advantage in neurological improvement compared to endovascular treatment (OR = 2.10, 95% CI: 0.83–5.31, p = 0.5651, I² = 0%). Complete obliteration rates were significantly higher in the microsurgical group (OR = 11.93, 95% CI = 2.12–66.97, p = 0.0049; I² = 70.6%). Recurrence rates did not differ significantly (OR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.02–2.81, p = 0.2416). Overall complications were similar (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.09–4.62, p = 0.0007, I² = 79.1%), although microsurgery had significantly fewer ischemic complications (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07–0.70, p = 0.0104). Mortality rates were also comparable (RR = 1.87, 95% CI: 0.28–12.66, p = 0.5213, I² = 25.9%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Microsurgery offers higher obliteration rates and fewer ischemic complications, while overall outcomes support individualized treatment planning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51141,"journal":{"name":"Neurochirurgie","volume":"71 6","pages":"Article 101729"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurochirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002837702500102X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas (CCJ AVFs) are rare and complex vascular lesions that pose significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Despite advances in neuroimaging, optimal treatment strategies remain controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of microsurgical versus endovascular approaches for treating CCJ AVFs.
Methods
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was conducted up to March 2024. Studies were included if they reported outcomes of microsurgical or endovascular treatment for CCJ AVFs, including neurological improvement, complete obliteration, recurrence, and complications. Data were synthesized using a random-effects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.
Results
Seven studies with 451 patients were included (microsurgery: n = 348; endovascular: n = 103). Microsurgery showed no statistically significant advantage in neurological improvement compared to endovascular treatment (OR = 2.10, 95% CI: 0.83–5.31, p = 0.5651, I² = 0%). Complete obliteration rates were significantly higher in the microsurgical group (OR = 11.93, 95% CI = 2.12–66.97, p = 0.0049; I² = 70.6%). Recurrence rates did not differ significantly (OR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.02–2.81, p = 0.2416). Overall complications were similar (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.09–4.62, p = 0.0007, I² = 79.1%), although microsurgery had significantly fewer ischemic complications (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07–0.70, p = 0.0104). Mortality rates were also comparable (RR = 1.87, 95% CI: 0.28–12.66, p = 0.5213, I² = 25.9%).
Conclusion
Microsurgery offers higher obliteration rates and fewer ischemic complications, while overall outcomes support individualized treatment planning.
期刊介绍:
Neurochirurgie publishes articles on treatment, teaching and research, neurosurgery training and the professional aspects of our discipline, and also the history and progress of neurosurgery. It focuses on pathologies of the head, spine and central and peripheral nervous systems and their vascularization. All aspects of the specialty are dealt with: trauma, tumor, degenerative disease, infection, vascular pathology, and radiosurgery, and pediatrics. Transversal studies are also welcome: neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, neurology, neuropediatrics, psychiatry, neuropsychology, physical medicine and neurologic rehabilitation, neuro-anesthesia, neurologic intensive care, neuroradiology, functional exploration, neuropathology, neuro-ophthalmology, otoneurology, maxillofacial surgery, neuro-endocrinology and spine surgery. Technical and methodological aspects are also taken onboard: diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, methods for assessing results, epidemiology, surgical, interventional and radiological techniques, simulations and pathophysiological hypotheses, and educational tools. The editorial board may refuse submissions that fail to meet the journal''s aims and scope; such studies will not be peer-reviewed, and the editor in chief will promptly inform the corresponding author, so as not to delay submission to a more suitable journal.
With a view to attracting an international audience of both readers and writers, Neurochirurgie especially welcomes articles in English, and gives priority to original studies. Other kinds of article - reviews, case reports, technical notes and meta-analyses - are equally published.
Every year, a special edition is dedicated to the topic selected by the French Society of Neurosurgery for its annual report.