Radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations: The University of Toronto experience

23Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: From July 1989 to February 1996, 130 patients underwent sterotactic radiosurgery. We report the results of the first 50 patients eligible for a minimum of three years of follow-up. Methods: Twenty women and 30 men, (mean age: 37.5 years) were treated by dynamic rotation on a 6 MV linear accelerator. Prior treatment was embolization in seventeen, surgery in three and embolization and surgery in six. All had DSA and enhanced CT scanning, while some had MRI. Forty-seven treatments used a single isodose. Restricting eloquent normal tissue to 15 Gy, margin doses (at 50 - 90% isodose) were 12 Gy (one patient); 15 Gy (sixteen patients): 20 Gy (31 patients); 25 Gy (two patients). Maximum diameters were: < 1.5 cm (12 patients); < 2.0 cm (nine patients); < 2.5 cm (twelve patients); < 3.0 cm (thirteen patients; 3.0 cm (four patients). Results: Forty-five patients were evaluable at three years, with thirty-nine having angiography. Twenty-five had angiographically confirmed obliterations; two had parenchymal AVMs obliterated but with residual dural components; four had MRI evidence of obliteration (refused angiography). One patient acutely had a seizure; one patient (with hemorrhages, resection, and embolizations preceding two applications of radiosurgery, separated by 3.5 years) had worsening of memory. Conclusions: Our uncorrected (five patients unevaluable at three years) and corrected angiographically confirmed obliteration rates are 54% and 60% respectively. Our follow-up (98% accounting of cohort; 78% angiographic rate) and explicit derivation of denominators help delineate the efficacy of radiosurgery at these doses.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Young, C., Summerfield, R., Schwartz, M., O’Brien, P., & Ramani, R. (1997). Radiosurgery for arteriovenous malformations: The University of Toronto experience. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 24(2), 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0317167100021405

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free