From the Division of Clinical Neurosciences, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences (F.M., C.B.J., J.M.H., R.J.S., C.P.W., R.A.-S.S.), and Centre for Population Health Sciences (M.A.H., G.D.M.), University of Edinburgh; the Division of Applied Health Sciences (C.E.C.), University of Aberdeen; and the Institute of Neurological Sciences (J.J.B., V.P.), Southern General Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Neurology. 2014 Aug 12;83(7):582-9. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000684. Epub 2014 Jul 3.
There have been few comparative studies of microsurgical excision vs conservative management of cerebral cavernous malformations (CCM) and none of them has reliably demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant difference.
We conducted a prospective, population-based study to identify and independently validate definite CCM diagnoses first made in 1999-2003 in Scottish adult residents. We used multiple sources of prospective follow-up to assess adults' dependence and to identify and independently validate outcome events. We used univariate and multivariable survival analyses to test the influence of CCM excision on outcome, adjusted for prognostic factors and baseline imbalances.
Of 134 adults, 25 underwent CCM excision; these adults were younger (34 vs 43 years at diagnosis, p = 0.004) and more likely to present with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or focal neurologic deficit than adults managed conservatively (48% vs 26%; odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-6.5). During 5 years of follow-up, CCM excision was associated with a deterioration to an Oxford Handicap Scale score 2-6 sustained over at least 2 successive years (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.3) and the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or new focal neurologic deficit (adjusted HR 3.6, 95% CI 1.3-10.0).
CCM excision was associated with worse outcomes over 5 years compared to conservative management. Long-term follow-up will determine whether this difference is sustained over patients' lifetimes. Meanwhile, a randomized controlled trial appears justified.
This study provides Class III evidence that CCM excision worsens short-term disability scores and increases the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and new focal neurologic deficits.
目前针对脑动静脉畸形(CAVM)的显微切除与保守治疗比较的研究较少,且尚无研究可靠地证明两者在统计学和临床上有显著差异。
我们进行了一项前瞻性、基于人群的研究,以确定并独立验证在 1999 年至 2003 年期间首次在苏格兰成年居民中诊断出的明确 CAVM 病例。我们利用多种前瞻性随访来源来评估成人的依赖性,并确定和独立验证结果事件。我们使用单变量和多变量生存分析来检验 CAVM 切除对结果的影响,调整了预后因素和基线不平衡因素。
在 134 名成年人中,有 25 名接受了 CAVM 切除术;这些成年人更年轻(诊断时 34 岁比 43 岁,p=0.004),并且更有可能因症状性颅内出血或局灶性神经功能缺损而就诊,而非保守治疗者(48%比 26%;优势比 2.7,95%置信区间[CI] 1.1-6.5)。在 5 年的随访期间,CAVM 切除术与至少连续 2 年持续恶化的牛津残疾量表评分 2-6 相关(调整后的危害比[HR]2.2,95%CI 1.1-4.3),以及症状性颅内出血或新的局灶性神经功能缺损的发生(调整后的 HR 3.6,95%CI 1.3-10.0)。
与保守治疗相比,CAVM 切除术在 5 年内的预后更差。长期随访将确定这种差异是否在患者的一生中持续存在。同时,似乎有理由进行一项随机对照试验。
本研究提供了 III 级证据,表明 CAVM 切除术恶化了短期残疾评分,并增加了症状性颅内出血和新的局灶性神经功能缺损的风险。