Article Text

Download PDFPDF

E-195 Clinical and radiographic features and treatment approaches for caroticocavernous fistulae
Free
  1. J Vranic1,
  2. R Regenhardt1,
  3. A Awad2,
  4. O Doron1,
  5. J Rabinov1
  1. 1Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
  2. 2Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Abstract

Introduction Caroticocavernous fistulae (CCF) are a rare subtype of intracranial arteriovenous fistulae with variable clinical and angiographic presentations that make treatment selection challenging. This study aimed to describe the clinical outcomes in a cohort of CCF patients and identify clinical and angiographic features differentiating patients more likely to benefit from endovascular intervention.

Methods A single-center, retrospective analysis was performed to identify all patients with angiographically-confirmed CCF between 2000 and 2022. Pertinent data, including clinical symptoms, angiographic findings, treatment strategies, recurrence rates, and complications, were collected.

Results A total of 84 patients were included, of whom 67 (80%) underwent endovascular intervention and 17 (20%) were conservatively managed. Primary endovascular techniques were transvenous coil embolization (78%), feeder artery embolization (16%), and ICA flow diversion (8%). High-risk clinical symptoms, such as reduced visual acuity (53% of intervention vs 6% of conservative, p≤0.0001), and angiographic features, such as cortical (39% vs 0%, p=0.002) and ophthalmic venous reflux (91% vs 69%, p=0.034), were more common in the intervention group. All direct (Barrow Type A) CCFs underwent endovascular intervention (32% vs 0%, p=0.005), while indirect (Barrow types B-D) CCFs were common in the conservatively managed group (68% of intervention vs 100% of conservative, p=0.005). 31% of treated CCFs required retreatment, which primarily occurred with Barrow type D CCFs and following transvenous coil embolization as the initial treatment method. Procedure-related complications occurred in 10% of cases and consisted of cranial nerve palsies (n=5), asymptomatic dissection (n=1), and asymptomatic distal thromboembolic event (n=1).

Conclusions High-risk symptoms and angiographic features favor endovascular intervention. Various embolization techniques, including transvenous coil embolization, proved safe and effective; complications were rare and mostly transient. In select CCF patients without high-risk clinical or angiographic features, conservative observation was a safe and effective alternative to endovascular embolization. Longitudinal angiographic surveillance is essential for monitoring fistula persistence or recurrence.

Disclosures J. Vranic: None. R. Regenhardt: None. A. Awad: None. O. Doron: None. J. Rabinov: None.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.