Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate the selection and outcomes of multimodal interventional treatment for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) in A Randomised trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA)-eligible patients in a single institution.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 94 patients with unruptured and untreated AVMs, who had modified Rankin scale (mRS) scores of 0 or 1 at our institution between 2002 and 2014. The patients were divided into an intervention group and a conservative group, and the outcomes were compared. Similar to ARUBA, we defined the primary outcome as the composite endpoint of death or symptomatic stroke. The mRS was used to assess the functional outcome.
Results: Of the 94 patients, 75 were included in the intervention group and 19 were included in the conservative group. Additionally, among the 94 patients, 58, 29, and 7 patients had Spetzler-Martin grade I/II, III, and IV/V AVMs, respectively. The number of male patients and the mean age of the patients were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the conservative group (58.6% vs. 84.2%, P=0.03 and 40.8±13.9 vs. 48.4±18.4 years, P=0.04, respectively). However, no significant difference in the proportion of patients with grade I/II AVMs was noted between the groups (65.3% vs. 47.3%). In the intervention and conservative groups, the mean follow-up periods were 59.2±41.6 and 72.8±39.2 months, respectively (P=0.20), and the primary outcome occurred in 9 (12.3%) and 3 (17.6%) patients, respectively (P=0.56). The proportion of patients with a mRS score ≥2 at last follow-up was not significantly different between the two groups (6.9% vs. 11.7%). In the intervention group, the incidence of death or stroke was lower and functional outcomes were better among patients with grade I/II AVMs than among patients with grade III AVMs (4.1% vs. 20%, P=0.003 and 2.0% vs. 15.7%, P=0.04, respectively).
Conclusion: The present study found that for patients with unruptured AVMs, interventional treatment is not inferior to medical treatment alone. Multimodal interventional treatment is associated with good outcomes in patients with grade I/II AVMs. However, careful selection should be considered for patients with grade III AVMs.