4.4 Article

Follow-up of endovascular treatment of direct carotid-cavernous fistulas

Journal

NEURORADIOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 12, Pages 1127-1133

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-010-0683-8

Keywords

Carotid disease; Fistulas; Magnetic resonance imaging; MR angiography; Outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Direct carotid-cavernous fistula (CCF) is a direct communication between the internal carotid artery (ICA) and the cavernous sinus. Some patients treated with detachable balloons develop pseudoaneurysms or present with a true aneurysm recanalization in the cavernous ICA with poorly known long-term radiological and clinical progression. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the long-term clinical and radiological progression of patients treated with detachable balloons. The present study evaluated 13 patients previously treated for direct CCF by an endovascular approach. The follow-up period ranged between 19 and 128 months. Ophthalmological evaluation demonstrated alterations in eight patients (61.5%). All of these alterations were already present from the moment of the treatment and displayed no signs of progression. Cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) were performed in all patients, and 11 pseudoaneurysms were demonstrated in ten of the 11 patients in whom ICA patency had been preserved. Five patients were submitted for cerebral digital subtraction angiography (DSA) to characterize the pseudoaneurysms previously observed on MRA studies, with no significant differences in morphology, size, aneurismal neck, and number of lesions. Endovascular treatment of direct CCF with detachable balloons has been shown to be a long-term effective and stable therapeutic method. The authors found asymptomatic pseudoaneurysms in 91% of cases where the ICA patency was preserved. MRI and MRA demonstrated an accuracy similar to that of DSA in the diagnosis of pseudoaneurysms of cavernous ICA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available