An Official publication of The Asian Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AsianCNS)

Search Article
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Advertise Subscribe Contacts Login  Facebook Tweeter
  Users Online: 464 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 240-254

The “focus on aneurysm” principle: Classification and surgical principles of management of concurrent arterial aneurysm with arteriovenous malformation causing intracranial hemorrhage

1 Department of Neurosurgery, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Radiology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sanjay Behari
Department of Neurosurgery, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow - 226 014, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1793-5482.145340

Rights and Permissions

Context: Concurrent arterial aneurysms (AAs) occurring in 2.7-16.7% patients harboring an arteriovenous malformation (AVM) aggravate the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. Aim: We evaluate the variations of aneurysms simultaneously coexisting with AVMs. A classification-based management strategy and an abbreviated nomenclature that describes their radiological features is also proposed. Setting: Tertiary care academic institute. Statistics: Test of significance applied to determine the factors causing rebleeding in the groups of patients with concurrent AVM and aneurysm and those with only AVMs. Subjects and Methods: Sixteen patients (5 with subarachnoid hemorrhage and 11 with intracerebral/intraventricular hemorrhage; 10 with low flow [LF] and 6 with high flow [HF] AVMs) underwent radiological assessment of Spetzler Martin (SM) grading and flow status of AA + AVM. Their modified Rankin's score (mRS) at admission was compared with their follow-up (F/U) score. Results: Pre-operative mRS was 0 in 5, 2 in 6, 3 in 1, 4 in 3 and 5 in 1; and, SM grade I in 5, II in 3, III in 3, IV in 4 and V in 1 patients, respectively. AA associated AVMs were classified as: (I) Flow-related proximal (n = 2); (II) flow-related distal (n = 3); (III) intranidal (n = 5); (IV) extra-intranidal (n = 2); (V) remote major ipsilateral (n = 1); (VI) remote major contralateral (n = 1); (VII) deep perforator related (n = 1); (VIII) superficial (n = 1); and (IX) distal (n = 0). Their treatment strategy included: Flow related AA, SM I-III LF AVM: aneurysm clipping with AVM excision; nidal-extranidal AA, SM I-III LF AVM: Excision or embolization of both AA + AVM; nidal-extranidal and perforator-related AA, SM IV-V HF AVM: Only endovascular embolization or radiosurgery. Surgical decision-making for remote AA took into account their ipsilateral/contralateral filling status and vessel dominance; and, for AA associated with SM III HF AVM, it varied in each patient based on diffuseness of AVM nidus, flow across arteriovenous fistula and eloquence of cortex. Follow up (F/U) (23.29 months; range: 1.5-69 months) mRS scores were 0 in 12, 2 in 2, 3 in 1 and 6 in 1 patients, respectively. Conclusions: Patients with intracranial AVMs should be screened for concurrent AAs. Further grading, management protocols and prognostication should particularly “focus on the aneurysm.”

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded430    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal