A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal

Spinal dural arteriovenous fistulae: Treatments and outcomes a systematic review and meta-analysis




AuthorsBarić, Hrvoje; Trkulja, Vladimir; Garcia, Garcia Sergio; Raj, Rahul; Paturi, Jooa; Lehecka, Martin; Niemelä, Mika

PublisherInforma UK Limited

Publication year2025

Journal: British Journal of Neurosurgery

Journal name in sourceBritish Journal of Neurosurgery

ISSN0268-8697

eISSN1360-046X

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1080/02688697.2025.2533763

Publication's open availability at the time of reportingNo Open Access

Publication channel's open availability Partially Open Access publication channel

Web address https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02688697.2025.2533763


Abstract

Background
The objective was to explore factors associated with early outcomes in patients with spinal dural arteriovenous fistulae (sDAVF) treated by open surgery (Open) or endovascular procedures (Endo).

Methods
Data sources: MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Ovid to March 9, 2024. Study selection: adult sDAVF cohorts with ≥11 patients reporting on at least one of the outcomes of interest. Data extraction and synthesis: PRISMA guidelines were used to screen studies/extract data. Fistula closure rates, complication rates, and prevalence of the affected spine segments were analysed based on summary data. The post- vs. pre-procedural difference in clinical disability was based on individual patient data. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): (1) fistula closure rate; (2) early complications rate; (3) clinical disability; (4) prevalence of sDAVF across spine segments/levels.

Results
We identified 115 cohorts. Odds of closure (106 reports on Open, 82 on Endo, adjusted for covariates) were higher with Open vs. Endo (OR = 7.68, 95%CI 5.48–11.0). Odds of complications (59 reports on Open, 48 on Endo, adjusted) were similar for Open vs. Endo (OR = 1.02, 0.77–1.35, prediction 0.77–1.35). With adjustment (21 reports with individual patient data, 288 Open and 134 Endo procedures), reduction in disability scores was larger with Open vs. Endo (difference= −0.55, 95%CI −0.95, −0.15), consistently across the spinal segments, age, and sex. All estimates were resistant to bias (E-values = 4.99, 2.00, and 2.70).

Conclusions
Compared to Endo, Open is more likely to result in fistula closure and reduction of disability, with a similar probability of complications.



Keywords:
Arteriovenous fistulaendovascularmeta‐analysissurgery


Funding information in the publication
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.


Last updated on 14/01/2026 03:36:16 PM