Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleInterventional

Posterior Fossa Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas with Subarachnoid Venous Drainage: Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment

L. Détraz, K. Orlov, V. Berestov, V. Borodetsky, A. Rouchaud, L.G. de Abreu Mattos and C. Mounayer
American Journal of Neuroradiology August 2019, 40 (8) 1363-1368; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A6140
L. Détraz
aFrom the Service de Neuroradiologie Interventionnelle et Diagnostique (L.D.), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes-Hopital Laennec, Saint-Herblain, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L. Détraz
K. Orlov
bDepartment of Neurosurgery (K.O., V. Berestov), E. Meshalkin National Medical Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Novosibirsk, Russia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for K. Orlov
V. Berestov
bDepartment of Neurosurgery (K.O., V. Berestov), E. Meshalkin National Medical Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Novosibirsk, Russia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for V. Berestov
V. Borodetsky
cService de Radiologie (V. Borodetsky, A.R.. L.G.d.A.M., C.M.), Neuroradiologie Interventionnelle, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, Limoges, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for V. Borodetsky
A. Rouchaud
cService de Radiologie (V. Borodetsky, A.R.. L.G.d.A.M., C.M.), Neuroradiologie Interventionnelle, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, Limoges, France
dCNRS (A.R., C.M.), XLIM, UMR 7252, University of Limoges, Limoges, France.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A. Rouchaud
L.G. de Abreu Mattos
cService de Radiologie (V. Borodetsky, A.R.. L.G.d.A.M., C.M.), Neuroradiologie Interventionnelle, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, Limoges, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L.G. de Abreu Mattos
C. Mounayer
cService de Radiologie (V. Borodetsky, A.R.. L.G.d.A.M., C.M.), Neuroradiologie Interventionnelle, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, Limoges, France
dCNRS (A.R., C.M.), XLIM, UMR 7252, University of Limoges, Limoges, France.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C. Mounayer
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Dural AVFs located in the posterior fossa are a rare entity. The objectives of the study were to analyze the anatomy of dural AVFs, their endovascular treatment strategies, and clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two centers retrospectively selected patients treated between January 2009 and June 2018 having posterior fossa dural AVFs. We collected patient demographics, clinical presentation, arterial and venous outflow anatomy of the dural AVFs, and treatment outcomes.

RESULTS: Twenty-six patients treated endovascularly for posterior fossa dural AVFs, type III, IV, or V, were included. One hundred percent of the dural AVFs were occluded. A transarterial approach was performed in 23 dural AVFs (88.5%); a combined transarterial and transvenous approach, for 2 dural AVFs (7.7%); and a transvenous approach alone, for 1 dural AVF (3.8%). The middle meningeal artery was the most common artery chosen to inject embolic liquid (46%, 12/26). Procedure-related morbidity was 15.4% at 24 hours, 7.7% at discharge, and 0% at 6 months. Procedure-related mortality was 0%.

CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment offers high occlusion rates for posterior fossa dural AVFs with low morbidity and mortality rates. The arterial approach is the first-line preferred approach, even if a transvenous or combined approach would be a safe and effective option for patients with favorable anatomy.

ABBREVIATIONS:

APA
ascending pharyngeal artery
dAVF
dural AVF
MHT
meningohypophyseal trunk
MMA
middle meningeal artery
NAEL
nonadhesive embolic liquid
PMA
posterior meningeal artery

Dural AVFs (dAVFs) are a rare pathology, accounting for 10%–15% of all intracranial vascular shunts.1 dAVFs of the posterior fossa are defined as intracranial direct shunts involving the tentorium and the dura that covers the remainder of the posterior fossa.2

On the basis of their drainage, dAVFs of the posterior fossa can be divided into 2 entities: benign fistulas,3 draining into a sinus, and those with a high risk of bleeding, with a subarachnoid venous drainage. If one excluded shunts of the transverse and sigmoid sinuses, posterior fossa fistulas are the most dangerous fistulas due to their cortical drainage at risk of rupture and their eloquent location.3,4

Due to their rarity, only a few studies2⇓–4 have described the anatomic settings, clinical presentation, and endovascular management of posterior fossa dAVFs. Hence, we reviewed dAVFs located in the posterior fossa with subarachnoid venous drainage from 2 centers (University Hospital of Limoges, France and National Medical Research, Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Novosibirsk, Russia), all treated by an endovascular approach. We analyzed their anatomy and clinical presentation and discussed their endovascular treatment.

Materials and Methods

Data Collection

Data regarding patient demographics, baseline clinical presentations, embolization techniques, and follow-up outcomes were collected in prospective data bases of dural arteriovenous shunts treated by an endovascular approach at 2 interventional neuroradiology centers from January 2009 to June 2018. During this period, every patient presenting at the hospital with a posterior fossa dAVF with subarachnoid venous drainage, ruptured or not, was treated by a multidisciplinary neurovascular staff (neurosurgeons and neuroradiologist). Cases of posterior fossa dAVFs with subarachnoid venous drainage have been retrospectively identified from those data bases for this specific study. A retrospective analysis of the patient record, neuroimaging, and follow-up was performed by 2 investigators in each center. At least 1 of the 2 investigators was not involved into the patient's treatment. Investigators had at least 2 years of experience in interventional neuroradiology. In case of discrepancy, the investigators reviewed the cases together to reach consensus.

Patient Selection

All cases were diagnosed with initial MR imaging or CT angiography and further confirmed and analyzed by selective DSA. Initial DSA included a complete angiography (bilateral internal and external carotid arteries, and bilateral vertebral artery).

Inclusion criteria were endovascularly treated patients with ruptured and unruptured dAVFs, with a dural shunt located in the posterior fossa and subarachnoid venous drainage. Exclusion criteria were dAVFs directly draining into the sinus.

Endovascular Treatment Protocol

In each center, the therapeutic strategy was defined by a multidisciplinary neurovascular team. All the selected patients had been treated endovascularly, under general anesthesia. Procedures were performed in a biplane, flat panel angiographic suite (Allura Xper FD20; Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands). Arterial vascular access was achieved by a transfemoral approach using a 6F catheter. When venous access was needed, a transjugular or transfemoral approach was used. For each patient, 3000–5000 IU of heparin was administered intravenously at the beginning of the intracranial catheterization.

Nonadhesive embolic liquid (NAEL) and adhesive embolic liquid agents were used. NAELs used were the following: Onyx (Covidien, Irvine, California), SQUID (http://medcinpharma.com/products-solutions/emboflu/), or Precipitating Hydrophobic Injectable Liquid (PHIL; MicroVention, Tustin, California). The adhesive embolic liquid used was Glubran Tiss (Glubran®, GEM, Viareggio, Italy).

Clinical and Imaging Follow-Up

Every patient underwent full clinical and neurologic evaluation by the senior neuroradiologist in charge, before the treatment, at awakening, at discharge, and 6 months after the endovascular procedure. The 6-months evaluation was usually followed by DSA. If DSA was not performed, patients underwent MR imaging. The mRS was assessed before the treatment, at discharge, and at 6 months. A stable or improved mRS between pretreatment and 6-month follow-up was considered a good clinical outcome.

Results

Patient Baseline Characteristics

Of the 198 dAVFs treated in the 2 centers, 26 patients (13.1%) presented with posterior fossa dAVFs with subarachnoid venous drainage and were included in this study. The mean age was 54 ± 15 years (range, 23–80 years) with 80.7% men (21/26). Eight patients (30.7%) presented with intracranial hemorrhage (On-line Table 1).

According to the Cognard classification,5 10 dAVFs (38.5%) were type III, 10 were type IV (38.5%), and 6 were type V (23.1%).

Clinical symptoms leading to the diagnosis were headache (9 cases, 34.6%), cerebellar syndrome (4 cases, 15.4%), hemiparesis (2 cases, 7.7%), myelopathy (4 cases, 15.4%), acute cervical pain (1 case, 3.8%), and pulsatile tinnitus (1 case, 3.8%). Five cases (19.2%) were incidental findings.

Location and Angioarchitecture

All dAVFs were fed by a meningeal branch of the external carotid artery. Multiple arterial feeders were observed in 84.4% (22/26) of cases, with a bilateral supply in 61.5% (16/26). The most common feeding artery was the middle meningeal artery (MMA) (11 cases, 42.3%; 7 from a tentorial branch, 3 from a squamous branch, 1 from a petrosal branch); then, the posterior meningeal artery (PMA) arising from the vertebral artery (11 cases, 42.3%); the PMA from occipital artery (9 cases, 34.6%); the medial tentorial branch of the meningohypophyseal trunk (MHT) (7 cases, 26.7%); and the ascending pharyngeal artery (APA) (6 cases, 23.1%; 3 from the hypoglossal branch and 3 from the jugular branch) (Fig 1 and On-line Table 1).

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Arterial feeders of the dAVFs and number of dAVF fed by a given artery. Twenty-two of 26 dAVFs had multiple feeders. OA indicates occipital artery; PB, petrous branch; TB, tentorial branch; SB, squamous branch; VA, vertebral artery.

Seven dAVFs with a petrosal location presented with a shunt into the superior petrosal vein: Five dAVFs had a venous outflow into the basal vein, 1 dAVF had an outflow into the tentorial lateral sinus, and 1 dAVF, into the perimedullary veins (On-line Tables 1 and 2).

Four dAVFs located on the free edge of the tentorium presented with a shunt into the tectal vein with a venous outflow into the torcular. All were supplied by a meningeal branch of the superior cerebellar artery with different secondary supplies, with branches arising from the internal carotid artery or from the PMA (On-line Tables 1 and 2).

Eight dAVFs with a posterior tentorial location presented with a shunt into the declival vein with an outflow into the cerebellar veins (On-line Tables 1 and 2).

Two dAVFs also presented with a posterior tentorial location but with a shunt into the inferior cerebellar vein and a lateral tentorial sinus outflow (On-line Tables 1 and 2).

Six dAVFs had a perimedullary outflow: Five dAVFs were located on the foramen magnum with a shunt into the lateral medullary vein and without any MMA feeding, whereas 1 dAVF, described above, had a petrosal location with a shunt into the superior petrosal vein, fed by the tentorial branch of MMA (On-line Tables 1 and 2).

Endovascular Treatment Strategies

A transarterial approach was performed in 23 dAVFs (88.5%); a combined transarterial and transvenous approach, in 2 patients (7.7%); and a transvenous approach alone, in 1 patient (3.8%) (On-line Tables 1 and 2 and Table). During the selected period, 100% of the dAVFs were totally occluded. Twenty-two (84.6%) dAVFs were totally occluded with a single session; 3 dAVFs, (7.7%) after 2 sessions; and 1 (3.8%), after 3 sessions. Details are provided in the Table. No patients had an operation.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Endovascular treatment strategy

Regarding dAVFs draining into the basal vein, MMA embolization was the first option in 80.0% of cases, even if the MHT/infero-lateral trunk was the principal feeder. One dAVF was occluded using a single transvenous approach due to the narrowed caliber of the main feeding artery and the risk of reflux into the ICA. Details are provided in Fig 2.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Transvenous approach. Arteriography of a petrosal dAVF with petrosal outflow, fed by the recurrent tentorial branch of the infero-lateral trunk and a posterior meningeal branch, draining into the internal temporal vein. Retrograde catheterization of the straight sinus via the jugular golf and lateral sinus. Two Echelon 10 microcatheters (Covidien) were navigated to the foot vein located on the internal temporal vein. By means of 1 microcatheter, platinum coils were rolled; then Onyx 18 was injected through the second microcatheter. The dAVF was totally cured at the end of the intervention. A, Lateral initial angiogram. B, Transvenous coiling. C, Transvenous Onyx injection. D, Cast of Onyx and coils.

dAVFs with a tectal shunt and a torcular outflow were fed by the meningeal branch of the SCA and by different accessory supplies from the PMA or the MHT. Hence, embolization through the meningeal branch of the SCA was the first option (50.0% of the cases) when the navigation and Onyx reflux were acceptable. For 1 case, due to incomplete occlusion and arterial navigation difficulties, embolization was completed by a transvenous approach with a pressure cooker technique using coils and NAEL to increase the ability to push more NAEL and control the flow.

Concerning dAVFs draining into the cerebellar cortical veins, the MMA was the most frequent feeder (75.0%), and the embolization via the MMA was the first option when possible (5 cases, 62.5%) (Fig 3). The PMA (3 cases, 37.5%) and transosseous branches (1 case, 12.5%) were the second option due to the risk of ischemia in case of reflux into the vertebral artery and navigation difficulties.

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Transarterial approach. Arteriography of a ruptured dAVF with a shunt located in the declival vein and venous outflow into the cerebellar veins, fed by the PMA of the vertebral artery, transosseous branches of the occipital artery and squamous branch of the MMA. The MMA was catheterized; platinum coils were rolled into the MMA to improve NAEL penetration, and then, NAEL was injected. A, Lateral initial angiogram via the external carotid artery. B, Lateral initial angiogram via the vertebral artery. C, Coils with the pressure cooker technique in the MMA. D, Final cast of Onyx and coils.

For dAVFs draining into the lateral tentorial sinus, a transarterial approach via the MMA was the first option when possible. In 1 case, a complementary transvenous approach through the tentorial sinus was also performed because of the partial occlusion via injection of embolic liquid through a narrow MMA. Occlusion was total.

For dAVFs draining into the perimedullary veins, a venous approach was not possible. Regarding the foramen magnum fistulas, despite the frequency of anastomosis in this area, 3 cases (60.0%) of dAVFs were treated via the PMA. For the petrosal location, the MMA was chosen (Fig 4).

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

Double balloons with a pressure cooker technique. Arteriography of an unruptured petrosal dAVF, fed by the medial tentorial branch of the MHT and a tentorial branch of the MMA, draining into superior petrosal vein with an outflow into the perimedullary veins. A balloon pressure cooker technique was used. A Scepter XC 4 × 11 balloon (MicroVention, Tustin, California) was inflated in the MMA to improve the Onyx injection, while protecting the carotid siphon with a Copernic balloon (Balt Extrusion, Montmorency, France). While both balloons were inflated, Onyx 18 was injected in a single session using a Marathon microcatheter (Covidien). Total occlusion of the shunt was noted on the final angiography. A, Antero-posterior initial angiogram. B, Lateral initial angiogram. C, Balloon pressure cooker technique in the MMA with the balloon-protecting device in the ICA. D, Final cast of Onyx.

Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes

Treatment-related morbidity was observed in 4 patients (15.4%), including 2 with complete recovery in <24 hours. The 2 other patients had a full recovery at 6-month follow-up. Transient symptoms presented were a fourth cranial nerve palsy after NAEL embolization and hemiparesis after reflux of NAEL into the vertebral artery. The 2 major complications were hydrocephaly due to mass effect after a venous thrombosis and superior cerebellar ischemia due to a NAEL arterial reflux (On-line Table 1). We report no complications with transvenous or combined procedures. Thus, procedure-related morbidity at 24 hours was 15.5%; at discharge, it was 7.7%; and at 6 months, it was 0%. Procedure-related mortality was 0%.

Four patients were lost to follow-up, for whom the mRS at discharge was zero. Compared with the clinical situation at the time of diagnosis, every patient had a stable or improved clinical situation at 6 months (Fig 5). All of them achieved independence (mRS < 2) at 6 months or at discharge versus 80.0% at the time of the diagnosis.

Fig 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 5.

mRS before treatment at the time of the diagnosis and 6 months after treatment when available, or at discharge if not.

Twenty-two patients (84.6%) underwent a control angiography at 6 months, which showed permanent occlusion for each of them.

Discussion

Treatment Considerations and Classification

When intervention is indicated, the cornerstone of dAVF treatment is the disconnection of the vein foot. Proximal draining veins must be occluded at the end of the treatment.6 Due to their rarity, endovascular treatment of posterior fossa dAVFs has been less often described. Nevertheless, the arterial approach is the most common one even if a transvenous or combined approach can be a safe and effective option.7,8 As described in the literature,7 in our series the transarterial route was the first-line approach. However, regarding the 3 patients treated by a transvenous approach, alone or combined, we detected no clinical complications, and the mRS was stable or improved at 6 months for those patients. Hence, even if we cannot support any conclusion with such a small number of patients, the transvenous approach could be an option for some selective cases.

Furthermore, in agreement with the literature,6,9,10 the MMA was the most commonly selected artery to navigate to the shunt, even if it was not the main feeding artery, because of the less tortuous route and the lower rate of dangerous anastomosis. We report 2 main complications: extended venous thrombosis causing hydrocephaly and cerebellar ischemia unrelated to the MMA navigation.

In the present series, complication rates linked to the procedure were low. However, the complication rates reported in the literature were even lower. Indeed, Maimon et al6 reported a complication rate of 5.8%, and Cognard et al,11 a rate of 6.7%. However, those rates do not specifically concern posterior fossa dAVFs but all dAVFs with cortical venous drainage, including dAVFs that are considered safer to treat. Besides, Zhou et al,4 in a series of 5 tentorial dAVFs, reported 1 complication (20%) due to a cerebellar infarctus, whereas Motebajane and Choi,12 in a series of 12 dAVFs of the foramen magnum treated with n-BCA, reported no complications as Liang et al13 in a series of 5 dAVFs of the foramen magnum treated with Onyx. Besides, tentorial fistulas are more challenging because there is usually a dural supply from both the internal and external carotid arteries, increasing the procedural risk of intracranial embolic events.9 Furthermore, because the venous drainage pattern is linked to the clinical symptoms,14,15 this slightly higher complication rate regarding fossa posterior fistulas might be linked to the specificity of posterior fossa drainage. Likewise, posterior fossa fistulas are located in a very eloquent zone.

Finally, the complication rate of the present series might also be linked to a more intensive endovascular treatment because 100% of the dAVFs were occluded, whereas Maimon et al6 reported a rate of 88.3%, and Cognard et al,11 a rate of 80% of total occlusion.

Anatomic Considerations and Classification

We analyzed 26 dAVFs of the posterior fossa with infratentorial venous drainage. Because of the importance of venous drainage in the clinical presentation,15 special attention should be given to the venous outflow to improve the understanding of the shunt and the flow. Venous outflow can be defined according to the main draining vein at the level of the shunt. Thus, based on their venous outflow, cases have been classified into 5 groups, considering the shunt, the arterial feeders, and the treatment strategy.

The 5 groups noted were the following: group 1, vein outflow into the basal vein; group 2, vein outflow into the torcular; group 3, vein outflow into the cerebellar cortical vein; group 4, vein outflow into the lateral tentorial sinus; and group 5, vein outflow into the perimedullary venous plexus.

Other classifications exist but are not adapted to the endovascular approach because they are not specifically based on the outflow. Indeed, Lawton et al16 established a very detailed classification dividing 31 tentorial dAVFs into 6 groups. Nevertheless, this classification is anatomic and does not examine the venous outflow pattern. It is mainly to prepare the surgical access but is not adapted for an endovascular approach. There is another classification based on the location of the shunt and not on the outflow, thus including a posterior fossa shunt with occasionally supratentorial drainage.17 Hence, the proposed classification is more adapted to the endovascular approach and based on venous outflow, which is the most clinically impactful.15 However, due to the rarity of the cases, this classification has to be strengthened by further studies including more patients.

All of the dAVFs draining into the basal vein were petrosal and had a venous shunt into the superior petrosal vein. One other petrosal dAVF drained into the tentorial sinus, and another petrosal dAVF drained into perimedullary veins. Hence, for petrosal dAVFs, the anatomic location of the shunt did not predict the outflow and thus the symptoms, enhancing the need for a classification considering the venous outflow. In fact, our results were consistent with the pattern of drainage of the petrosal dAVF, which was described by Li et al18 and Matsushima et al.19 They classified petrosal dAVFs into 4 groups based on the draining area: the posterior mesencephalic group, anterior pontomesencephalic group, petrosal group, and tentorial group. They showed that all patients from the posterior mesencephalic group and some patients from the pontomesencephalic group had supratentorial drainage via a connection to the basilar vein. However, in the present series, we focused only on infratentorial drainage, so we do not present any pontomesencephalic dAVFs in our series.

Regarding the perimedullary drainage, the 5 dAVFs with a shunt into the lateral medullary vein were located on the foramen magnum and fed by the PMA of the vertebral artery or the APA as classically described in the literature.3,12

Limitations

Limitations should be noted in the present series. First, it is a retrospective analysis with inherent bias due to this method. Second, the cohort is relatively small because posterior fossa dAVFs are rare, and patients were not randomized into transarterial, transvenous, or combined approaches, which does not allow comparison among the different endovascular approaches.

Finally, due to their rarity, not many studies focusing on dAVFs of the posterior fossa can be found in the literature. To our knowledge, our series is the largest in the literature specifically concerning dAVFs of the posterior fossa.

Conclusions

dAVFs of the posterior fossa with subarachnoid venous drainage are rare and difficult to treat. Special attention should be given to the venous outflow to understand the pathology and analyze the therapeutic procedure. An arterial approach was the most common. A venous approach, isolated or combined, could also to be safe and successful in some selected cases; additional data are needed regarding this approach.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge Suzana Saleme and Vladimir Boretsky for their support.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Newton TH,
    2. Cronqvist S
    . Involvement of dural arteries in intracranial arteriovenous malformations. Radiology 1969;93:1071–78 doi:10.1148/93.5.1071 pmid:5350675
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Newton TH,
    2. Weidner W,
    3. Greitz T
    . Dural arteriovenous malformation in the posterior fossa. Radiology 1968;90:27–35 doi:10.1148/90.1.27 pmid:5635134
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Chiras J,
    3. Meder JF, et al
    . Dural arteriovenous fistulas of the posterior fossa draining into subarachnoid veins. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1992;13:315–23 pmid:1595468
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Zhou LF,
    2. Chen L,
    3. Song DL, et al
    . Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulas. Surg Neurol 2007;67:472–81; discussion 481–82 doi:10.1016/j.surneu.2006.08.078 pmid:17445607
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Cognard C,
    2. Gobin YP,
    3. Pierot L, et al
    . Cerebral dural arteriovenous fistulas: clinical and angiographic correlation with a revised classification of venous drainage. Radiology 1995;194:671–80 doi:10.1148/radiology.194.3.7862961 pmid:7862961
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Maimon S,
    2. Nossek E,
    3. Strauss I, et al
    . Transarterial treatment with Onyx of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistula with cortical drainage in 17 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:2180–84 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2728 pmid:21998110
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Lee SK,
    2. Hetts SW,
    3. Halbach V, et al
    ; Standard and Guidelines Committee for the Society of Neurointerventional Surgery. Standard and guidelines: intracranial dural arteriovenous shunts. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:516–23 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012116 pmid:26614491
    FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Wong GK,
    2. Poon WS,
    3. Yu SC, et al
    . Transvenous embolization for dural transverse sinus fistulas with occluded sigmoid sinus. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2007;149:929–35; discussion 935–36 doi:10.1007/s00701-007-1264-4 pmid:17700989
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Kortman H,
    2. Bloemsma G,
    3. Boukrab I, et al
    . Treatment of cranial dural arteriovenous fistulas with exclusive cortical venous drainage: a single-center cohort of 35 patients. Interv Neuroradiol 2017;23:661–65 doi:10.1177/1591019917728399 pmid:28975855
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Stiefel MF,
    2. Albuquerque FC,
    3. Park MS, et al
    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulae using Onyx: a case series. Neurosurgery 2009;65(6 Suppl):132–39; discussion 139–40 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000345949.41138.01 pmid:19934987
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Cognard C,
    2. Januel AC,
    3. Silva NA Jr., et al
    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas with cortical venous drainage: new management using Onyx. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:235–41 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0817 pmid:17989374
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Motebejane MS,
    2. Choi IS
    . Foramen magnum dural arteriovenous fistulas: clinical presentations and treatment outcomes: a case-series of 12 patients. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2018;15:262–69 doi:10.1093/ons/opx229 pmid:29126165
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Liang G,
    2. Gao X,
    3. Li Z, et al
    . Endovascular treatment for dural arteriovenous fistula at the foramen magnum: report of five consecutive patients and experience with balloon-augmented transarterial Onyx injection. J Neuroradiol 2013;40:134–39 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2012.09.001 pmid:23433906
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Houser OW,
    2. Baker HL Jr.,
    3. Rhoton AL Jr., et al
    . Intracranial dural arteriovenous malformations. Radiology 1972;105:55–64 doi:10.1148/105.1.55 pmid:5057316
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Lasjaunias P,
    2. Chiu M,
    3. ter Brugge K, et al
    . Neurological manifestations of intracranial dural arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1986;64:724–30 doi:10.3171/jns.1986.64.5.0724 pmid:3701421
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Lawton MT,
    2. Sanchez-Mejia RO,
    3. Pham D, et al
    . Tentorial dural arteriovenous fistulae: operative strategies and microsurgical results for six types. Neurosurgery 2008;62(3 Suppl 1):110–24; discussion 124–25 doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000317381.68561 pmid:18424975
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Byrne JV,
    2. Garcia M
    . Tentorial dural fistulas: endovascular management and description of the medial dural-tentorial branch of the superior cerebellar artery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1798–804 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3519 pmid:23660293
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Li J,
    2. Ren J,
    3. Du S, et al
    . Dural arteriovenous fistulas at the petrous apex. World Neurosurg. 2018;119:e968–76 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.08.012 pmid:30103057
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Matsushima K,
    2. Matsushima T,
    3. Kuga Y, et al
    . Classification of the superior petrosal veins and sinus based on drainage pattern. Neurosurgery 2014;10(Suppl 2):357–67; discussion 367 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000323 pmid:24561869
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received April 19, 2019.
  • Accepted after revision June 19, 2019.
  • © 2019 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 40 (8)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 40, Issue 8
1 Aug 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Posterior Fossa Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas with Subarachnoid Venous Drainage: Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
L. Détraz, K. Orlov, V. Berestov, V. Borodetsky, A. Rouchaud, L.G. de Abreu Mattos, C. Mounayer
Posterior Fossa Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas with Subarachnoid Venous Drainage: Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment
American Journal of Neuroradiology Aug 2019, 40 (8) 1363-1368; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6140

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Posterior Fossa Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas with Subarachnoid Venous Drainage: Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment
L. Détraz, K. Orlov, V. Berestov, V. Borodetsky, A. Rouchaud, L.G. de Abreu Mattos, C. Mounayer
American Journal of Neuroradiology Aug 2019, 40 (8) 1363-1368; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6140
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref (2)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Sphenoid dural arteriovenous fistulas
    Michael George Zaki Ghali
    Neurosurgical Review 2021 44 1
  • Role of surgery in management of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas
    Young Sill Kang, Won-Sang Cho, Sung Ho Lee, Kangmin Kim, Hyun-Seung Kang, Jeong Eun Kim
    Journal of Cerebrovascular and Endovascular Neurosurgery 2023 25 2

More in this TOC Section

  • SAVE vs. Solumbra Techniques for Thrombectomy
  • CT Perfusion&Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke
  • Delayed Reperfusion Post-Thrombectomy&Thrombolysis
Show more Interventional

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire