Department of Neurosurgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Medical School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2021 May;204:106601. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.106601. Epub 2021 Mar 20.
Carotid Cavernous Fistulas (CCFs) are the result of an abnormal communication between the carotid artery and its branches and the venous system of the cavernous sinus. The mainstay of therapy for CCFs consists of transarterial or transvenous embolization, while other treatment options such as open surgery or radiosurgery are still utilized as second-line or adjuvant therapeutic options.
Our aim was to systematically review and summarize available data regarding short- and long-term outcomes of all available treatment modalities for CCFs.
This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A random effects model meta-analysis was conducted.
Fifty-seven studies comprising 1575 patients were included in this systematic review. Transarterial embolization for direct and indirect CCFs offered a complete obliteration rate of 93.93% (N = 589/627) and 81.51% (N = 119/146), respectively. Transvenous embolization for direct and indirect lesions achieved obliteration in 91.67% (N = 33/36) and 86.03% (N = 425/494) of patients, respectively. Comparison between transarterial and transvenous embolization did not reveal statistically significant differences in terms of fistula obliteration for direct (OR: 1.42; 95% CI: 0.23-8.90; I 0.0%) and indirect CCFs (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.31-1.23; I 0.0%).
Endovascular embolization techniques are the preferred treatment modality for the management of CCFs. No differences were identified between transarterial and transvenous embolization by synthesizing studies with available data. Future prospective cohorts are warranted to compare the different materials and techniques implemented especially within the rapidly expanding realm of endovascular approaches.
颈动脉海绵窦瘘(CCFs)是颈动脉及其分支与海绵窦静脉系统之间异常交通的结果。CCFs 的主要治疗方法包括经动脉或经静脉栓塞,而开放手术或放射外科等其他治疗方法仍被用作二线或辅助治疗选择。
我们旨在系统回顾和总结所有 CCF 治疗方法的短期和长期结果的现有数据。
本系统评价按照 PRISMA 指南进行。进行了随机效应模型荟萃分析。
这项系统评价纳入了 57 项研究,共包括 1575 名患者。直接和间接 CCF 经动脉栓塞的完全闭塞率分别为 93.93%(N=589/627)和 81.51%(N=119/146)。直接和间接病变经静脉栓塞的闭塞率分别为 91.67%(N=33/36)和 86.03%(N=425/494)。经动脉和经静脉栓塞之间的比较在直接(OR:1.42;95%CI:0.23-8.90;I²=0.0%)和间接 CCF(OR:0.62;95%CI:0.31-1.23;I²=0.0%)的瘘管闭塞方面没有显示出统计学上的显著差异。
血管内栓塞技术是治疗 CCF 的首选方法。综合现有数据的研究没有发现经动脉和经静脉栓塞之间的差异。需要未来的前瞻性队列研究来比较不同的材料和技术,特别是在迅速发展的血管内治疗方法领域。