medigraphic.com

2007, Number 4

Next >>

Med Sur 2007; 14 (4)

Dynamic definition of critical diameter in arteriovenous malformations for the treatment with radiosurgery gamma

Del Valle R, Rodríguez D, Zenteno M, Jaramillo J, De Anda S, Gamiño I, Ortiz J, Pérez M

Language: Spanish
References: 33
Page: 159-168
PDF size: 352.20 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Thirty years of cumulative experience worldwide indicate complete obliteration rates from 35% to 90% volume dependant. Objective: To propose a strategy to increase the obliteration rate for arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) through the dynamic definition of the critical zone, which is the hydrodynamically most sensitive target volume for radiosurgical gamma knife. Methods: We used a digital counter to measure several stages of the frame-by-frame circulation times of AVMs. 44 patients were treated using dynamic measurement planning to define the critical zone, including criteria that categorize the type of AVM: fistulous vs plexiform or mixed; Spetzler–Martin classification grades III 28, IV 14, V 2; with single treatments 37, repeated radiosurgery 4, or prospective stage radiosurgery 3. Endovascular therapy in 50% and superselective angiography in 34%. The preembolization AVM volume was up to 120 mL, with a critical zone target volume of up to 15 mL for single treatments, mean volume 8.5 mL, and 28 mL for prospectively staged radiosurgery. The marginal radiation dose 18–22 Gy, mean dose 20 Gy. Results: Digital subtraction angiography was performed in 36 patients 1–10 years after treatment. Complete obliteration was observed in 33 patients, including 12 grade IV and one grade V. The repeated radiosurgery group showed 100% complete obliteration. Neurological complications were observed in 7.5% of patients after preradiosurgery embolization. There was no mortality. Conclusion: Dynamic definition of the AVM critical zone might increase the obliteration rate, even in complex AVMs, allowing the treatment of smaller volumes off the recruitment vessels (pseudonidus).


REFERENCES

  1. Steiner L, Leksell L, Greitz T et al. Stereotaxic radiosurgery for cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Acta Chir Scand 1972; 138: 459-464.

  2. Steiner L, Linquist C. Radiosurgery in cerebral arteriovenous malformations, in Tasker RR(ed): Neurosurgery: State of the Art Review. Stereotactic Surgery. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus, 1987: 329-336.

  3. Lunsford LD, Kondziolka D, Flickinger JC et al. Stereotactic radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1991; 75: 512-524.

  4. Friedman WA, Bova FJ et al. Linear accelerator radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1992; 77: 832-841.

  5. Friedman WA, Bova FJ, Mendenhall WM. Linear accelerator radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations: The relationship of size to outcome. J Neurosurg 1995; 82:180-189.

  6. Flickinger JC, Pollock BE, Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD. A dose response analysis of arteriovenous malformations obliteration after radiosurgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 36: 873-879.

  7. Pollock BE, Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD, Bissonette DJ, Flickinger JC. Repeat stereotactic radiosurgery of arteriovenous malformations: Factors associated with incomplete obliteration. Neurosurgery 1996; 38: 318-324.

  8. Karlsson B, Linquist C, Steiner L. Prediction of obliteration after Gamma Knife surgery for cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 1997; 40: 425-431.

  9. Pollock BE, Flickinger JC, Lunsford LD et al. Factors associated with successful arteriovenous malformations radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 1998; 42: 1239-1244.

  10. Ellis TL, Friedman WA, Bova FJ, Kubilis PS, Buatti JM. Analysis of treatment failure after radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1998; 89: 104-110.

  11. Karlsson B, Lax I, Soderman M. Can the probability for obliteration after radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations be accurately predicted. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999; 43: 313-319.

  12. Chang JH, Chang JW, Park YG, Chung SS. Factors related to complete occlusion of arteriovenous malformations after gamma knife radiosurgery. J Neurosurg (Suppl) 2000; 93: 96-101.

  13. Pan HC et al. Gamma Knife radiosurgery as a single treatment modality for large cerebral arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg (Suppl) 2000; 93: 3: 113-119.

  14. Flickinger JC. An integrated logistic formula for prediction of complications from radiosurgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989; 17: 879-885.

  15. Lax I, Karlsson B. Prediction of complication in gamma knife radiosurgery of arteriovenous malformations. Acta Oncol 1996; 35: 49-55.

  16. Flickinger JC, Kondziolka D, Pollock B et al. Complications from arteriovenous malformation radiosurgery: multivariate analysis and risk modeling. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997; 38: 485-490.

  17. Flickinger JC, Lunsford LD, Kondziolka D. Dose prescription and dose-volume effects in radiosurgery. Neurosurg Clin N Am 1992; 3: 51-59.

  18. Karlsson B, Lax I, Sodermann M. Factors influencing the risk for complications following Gamma Knife radiosurgery for cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Radiother Oncol 1997; 43: 275-280.

  19. Friedman W, Blatt D, Bova F et al. The risk of hemorrhage after radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1996; 84: 912-919.

  20. Pollock BE, Flickinger JC, Lunsford LD et al. Hemorrhage risk after stereotactic radiosurgery of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 1996; 38: 652-659.

  21. Karlsson B, Linquist C, Steiner L. Effect of Gamma Knife surgery on the risk of rupture prior to AVM obliteration. Min Invas Neurosurg 1996; 39: 21-27.

  22. Karlsson B, Lax I, Sodermann M. Risk for hemorrhage during the 2-year latency period following Gamma Knife radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 49: 1045-1051.

  23. Friedman WA, Bova FJ, Bollampaly S, Bradshaw P. Analysis of factors predictive success or complications in arteriovenous malformation radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 2003; 52: 296-308.

  24. Maruyama K, Shin M, Tago M, Kishimoto J, Morita A, Kawahara N. Radiosurgery to reduce the risk of first hemorrhage from brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2007; 60: 453-459.

  25. Chang SD, Marcellus ML, Marks MP, Levy RP, Do HM, Steinberg GK. Multimodality treatment of giant intracranial arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2003; 53: 1-13.

  26. Meder JF, Oppenheim C, Blustajn J et al. Cerebral arteriovenous malformations: The value of radiologic parameters in predicting response to radiosurgery. AJNR 1997; 18: 1473-1483.

  27. Petereit D, Metha M, Turski P, Levin A, Strother Ch et al. Treatment of arteriovenous malformations with stereotactic radiosurgery employing both magnetic resonance angiography and standard angiography as a database. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 25: 309-313.

  28. Zenteno M, Jaramillo J. The predictive value of intrapedicle sodium amobarbital injection in conjunction with pressure recording. AJNR 1991; 12: 1241-1249.

  29. Luessenhop AJ, Spence WT. Artificial embolization of cerebral arteries. Report of use in a case of arteriovenous malformation. JAMA 1960; 172: 1153-1155.

  30. Frizzel RT, Fisher WS. Cure, morbidity and mortality associated with embolization of brain arteriovenous malformations: a review of 1246 patients in 32 series of a 35-year period. Neurosurgery 1995; 37:1031-1040.

  31. Haw CS, ter BruggeK, Willinsky R, Tomlinson G. Complications of embolization of arteriovenous malformations of the brain. J Neurosurg 2006; 104: 226-232.

  32. Andrade SYM, Ramani M, Scora D, Tsao MN, terBrugge K, Schwartz M. Embolization before radiosurgery reduces the obliteration rates of arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 2007; 60: 443-45.

  33. Del Valle R, Perez M, Ortiz J, De Anda S, Jaramillo J. Stereotactic noninvasive volume measurement compared with geometric measurement for indications and evaluation of gamma knife treatment. J Neurosurg (Suppl) 2005; 102: 140-142.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com