Top

Published in:

01-12-2024 | Brain Arteriovenous Malformation | Review

Enhancing the quality of evidence, comparability, and reproducibility in brain arteriovenous malformations treated with open surgery research: a systematic review and proposal of a reporting guideline for surgical and clinical outcomes

Authors: Marcio Y. Ferreira, Lucas P. Mitre, Anthony E. Bishay, Sávio Batista, Lucca B. Palavani, Leonardo B. Oliveira, Gabriel Semione, Filipi F. Andreão, Silvio Porto Junior, Marcelo P. Sousa, Pedro G. L. B. Borges, Raphael Camerotte, Raphael Bertani, Michael T. Lawton, Eberval G. Figueiredo

Published in: Neurosurgical Review | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (bAVMs) are rare but high-risk developmental anomalies of the vascular system. Microsurgery through craniotomy is believed to be the mainstay standard treatment for many grades of bAVMs. However, a significant challenge emerges in the existing body of clinical studies on open surgery for bAVMs: the lack of reproducibility and comparability. This study aims to assess the quality of studies reporting clinical and surgical outcomes for bAVMs treated by open surgery and develop a reporting guideline checklist focusing on essential elements to ensure comparability and reproducibility. This is a systematic literature review that followed the PRISMA guidelines with the search in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases, for studies published between January 1, 2018, and December 1, 2023. Included studies were scrutinized focusing on seven domains: (1) Assessment of How Studies Reported on the Baseline Characteristics of the Patient Sample; (2) Assessment and reporting on bAVMs grading, anatomical characteristics, and radiological aspects; (3) Angioarchitecture Assessment and Reporting; (4) Reporting on Pivotal Concepts Definitions; (5) Reporting on Neurosurgeon(s) and Staff Characteristics; (6) Reporting on Surgical Details; (7) Assessing and Reporting Clinical and Surgical Outcomes and AEs. A total of 47 studies comprising 5,884 patients were included. The scrutiny of the studies identified that the current literature in bAVM open surgery is deficient in many aspects, ranging from fundamental pieces of information of methodology to baseline characteristics of included patients and data reporting. Included studies demonstrated a lack of reproducibility that hinders building cumulative evidence. A bAVM Open Surgery Reporting Guideline with 65 items distributed across eight domains was developed and is proposed in this study aiming to address these shortcomings. This systematic review identified that the available literature regarding microsurgery for bAVM treatment, particularly in studies reporting clinical and surgical outcomes, lacks rigorous scientific methodology and quality in reporting. The proposed bAVM Open Surgery Reporting Guideline covers all essential aspects and is a potential solution to address these shortcomings and increase transparency, comparability, and reproducibility in this scenario. This proposal aims to advance the level of evidence and enhance knowledge regarding the Open Surgery treatment for bAVMs.

Available only for authorised users

Bokhari MR, Bokhari SRA (2023) Arteriovenous Malformation of the Brain. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island

Lawton MT, Rutledge WC, Kim H et al (2015) Brain arteriovenous malformations. Nat Rev Dis Primers 1:15008. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2015.8CrossRefPubMed

Li W, Sun Q, Duan X et al (2018) Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 43(11):1246–1250. https://doi.org/10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2018.11.013CrossRefPubMed

Conger A, Kulwin C, Lawton MT, Cohen-Gadol AA (2015) Endovascular and microsurgical treatment of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: Current recommendations. Surg Neurol Int 6:39. https://doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.153707CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lawton MT (2015) The role of AVM microsurgery in the aftermath of a randomized trial of unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36(4):617–619. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4193CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Khaliq A, Raza MH, Khizar A, Khan MI, Gul N, Hassan AU (2023) Outcomes of Microsurgical Resection of Low-Grade Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations: A Descriptive Observational Multicenter Study from a Low-Middle-Income Country. Pak J Neurol Surg 27(1):57–66. https://doi.org/10.36552/pjns.v27i1.835CrossRef

Ogilvy CS, Stieg PE, Awad I et al (2001) Recommendations for the Management of Intracranial Arteriovenous Malformations: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From a Special Writing Group of the Stroke Council, American Stroke Association. Stroke 32:1458–1471. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.32.6.1458CrossRefPubMed

Mohr JP, Overbey JR, Hartmann A et al (2020) Medical management with interventional therapy versus medical management alone for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA): final follow-up of a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 19(7):573–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(20)30181-2CrossRefPubMed

Hunter P (2017) The reproducibility "crisis": Reaction to replication crisis should not stifle innovation. EMBO Rep 18(9):1493–1496. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201744876CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Dickersin K, Mayo-Wilson E (2018) Standards for design and measurement would make clinical research reproducible and usable. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 115(11):2590–2594. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708273114CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Hughes BT, Niemann A, Tritz D, Boyer K, Robbins H, Vassar M (2022) Transparent and Reproducible Research Practices in the Surgical Literature. J Surg Res 274:116–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2021.09.024CrossRefPubMed

12.

Niven DJ, McCormick TJ, Straus SE et al (2018) Reproducibility of clinical research in critical care: a scoping review. BMC Med 16(1):26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1018-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336(7650):924–926. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ADCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Equator Network Platform. Library for Health Research Reporting. https://www.equator-network.org. Accessed 30 Jan 2024.

16.

Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c332. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c332CrossRef

17.

Reeves BC, Gaus W (2004) Guidelines for reporting non-randomised studies. Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd 11(Suppl 1):46–52. https://doi.org/10.1159/000080576CrossRefPubMed

18.

Mathew G, Sohrabi C, Franchi T et al (2023) Preferred Reporting Of Case Series in Surgery (PROCESS) 2023 guidelines. Int J Surg 109(12):3760–3769. https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000000940CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M et al (2007) Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 335(7624):806–808. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.ADCrossRef

20.

Aboukais R, Devalckeneer A, Boussemart P et al (2022) Is malignant edema and hemorrhage after occlusion of high-flow arteriovenous malformation related to the size of feeding arteries and draining veins? Neurochirurgie 68(5):e1–e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuchi.2022.01.008CrossRefPubMed

21.

Alfter M, Albiña-Palmarola P, Cimpoca A et al (2023) Multi-Stage Treatment for Spetzler-Martin Grades III, IV, and V Arteriovenous Malformations: Preoperative Embolization and Microsurgical Resection in a Consecutive Series of 250 Patients. J Clin Med 12(18):5990. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12185990CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Barros G, Sen RD, McGrath M et al (2022) Frailty Predicts Postoperative Functional Outcomes After Microsurgical Resection of Ruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations in Older Patients. World Neurosurg 164:e844–e851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2022.05.055CrossRefPubMed

23.

Burkhardt JK, Lasker GF, Winkler EA, Kim H, Lawton MT (2018) Microsurgical resection of brain arteriovenous malformations in the elderly: outcomes analysis and risk stratification. J Neurosurg 129(5):1107–1113. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.6.JNS17392CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Burkhardt JK, Winkler EA, Catapano JS, Spetzler RF, Lawton MT (2020) Surgical selection and outcomes among elderly patients with brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurg Focus 49(4):E9. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.7.FOCUS20464CrossRefPubMed

25.

Catapano JS, Frisoli FA, Nguyen CL et al (2021) Spetzler-Martin Grade III Arteriovenous Malformations: A Multicenter Propensity-Adjusted Analysis of the Effects of Preoperative Embolization. Neurosurgery 88(5):996–1002. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyaa551CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Catapano JS, Frisoli FA, Nguyen CL et al (2021) Intermediate-grade brain arteriovenous malformations and the boundary of operability using the supplemented Spetzler-Martin grading system. J Neurosurg 136(1):125–133. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.11.JNS203298CrossRefPubMed

27.

Chen CJ, Ding D, Wang TR et al (2019) Microsurgery Versus Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Arteriovenous Malformations: A Matched Cohort Study. Neurosurgery 84(3):696–708. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy174CrossRefPubMed

28.

Chen Y, Li R, Ma L et al (2020) Single-Stage Combined Embolization and Resection for Spetzler-Martin Grade III/IV/V Arteriovenous Malformations: A Single-Center Experience and Literature Review. Front Neurol 11:570198. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.570198CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Chui J, Niazi B, Venkatraghavan L (2020) Postoperative hemodynamic management in patients undergoing resection of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: A retrospective study. J Clin Neurosci 72:151–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2019.12.039CrossRefPubMed

30.

Copelan A, Drocton G, Caton MT et al (2020) Brain Arteriovenous Malformation Recurrence After Apparent Microsurgical Cure: Increased Risk in Children Who Present With Arteriovenous Malformation Rupture. Stroke 51(10):2990–2996. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.030135CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Deng Z, Chen Y, Ma L et al (2021) Long-term outcomes and prognostic predictors of 111 pediatric hemorrhagic cerebral arteriovenous malformations after microsurgical resection: a single-center experience. Neurosurg Rev 44(2):915–923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-019-01210-4CrossRefPubMed

32.

Donzelli GF, Nelson J, McCoy D et al (2019) The effect of preoperative embolization and flow dynamics on resection of brain arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 132(6):1836–1844. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.2.JNS182743CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Eliava S, Gorozhanin V, Shekhtman O, Pilipenko Y, Kuchina O (2021) Surgical Treatment of Unruptured Brain AVMs: Short- and Long-Term Results. Acta Neurochir Suppl 132:87–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63453-7_13CrossRefPubMed

34.

Fang W, Yang Z, Liu Y et al (2022) Peri-procedure efficacy and safety of one-stop hybrid surgery for the treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations: A single-center preliminary experience. Front Neurol 13:1052882. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1052882CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Frisoli FA, Catapano JS, Farhadi DS et al (2021) Spetzler-Martin Grade III Arteriovenous Malformations: A Comparison of Modified and Supplemented Spetzler-Martin Grading Systems. Neurosurgery 88(6):1103–1110. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyab020CrossRefPubMed

36.

Gami A, Feghali J, Rapaport S et al (2021) Microsurgical resection versus stereotactic radiosurgery for low-grade intracranial arteriovenous malformations: A 27-year institutional experience. J Clin Neurosci 94:209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2021.10.036CrossRefPubMed

37.

Gorgan RM, Petrescu GED, Brehar FM (2020) Microsurgical approach for symptomatic brain AVMs - single center experience. Neurol Res 42(12):1080–1084. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.2020.1803604CrossRefPubMed

38.

Jean WC, Huynh T, Tai AX, Felbaum DR, Syed HR, Ngo HM (2019) Outcome of Microsurgery for Arteriovenous Malformations in a Resource-Restricted Environment: Single-Surgeon Series from Vietnam. World Neurosurg 132:e66–e75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.256CrossRefPubMed

39.

Jiang Y, Zeng C, Zhang Y, Xu X, Qiu H, Jiang W (2022) Multimodality Treatment of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations with One-Staged Hybrid Operation: Clinical Characteristics and Long-Term Prognosis. Dis Markers 2022:2559004. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2559004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Jiao Y, Lin F, Wu J et al (2018) A supplementary grading scale combining lesion-to-eloquence distance for predicting surgical outcomes of patients with brain arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 128(2):530–540. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.10.JNS161415CrossRefPubMed

41.

Jiao Y, Wu J, Chen X et al (2019) Spetzler-Martin grade IV and V arteriovenous malformations: Treatment outcomes and risk factors for negative outcomes after surgical resection. J Clin Neurosci 61:166–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2018.10.101CrossRefPubMed

42.

Jiao Y, Li H, Fu W et al (2021) Classification of brain arteriovenous malformations located in motor-related areas based on location and anterior choroidal artery feeding. Stroke Vasc Neuro 6(3):441–448. https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2020-000591CrossRef

43.

Jiao Y, Zhao S, Li H et al (2022) Grading scale based on arcuate fasciculus segmentation to predict postoperative language outcomes of brain arteriovenous malformations. Stroke Vasc Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2021-001330

44.

Kaya I, Çakır V, Cingoz ID et al (2022) Comparison of cerebral AVMs in patients undergoing surgical resection with and without prior endovascular embolization. Int J Neurosci 132(7):735–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2021.1918689CrossRefPubMed

45.

Kilian A, Latino GA, White AJ et al (2023) Comparing Characteristics and Treatment of Brain Vascular Malformations in Children and Adults with HHT. J Clin Med 12(7):2704. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072704CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Li M, Jiang P, Guo R et al (2019) A Tractography-Based Grading Scale of Brain Arteriovenous Malformations Close to the Corticospinal Tract to Predict Motor Outcome After Surgery. Front Neurol 10:761. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2019.00761CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Link TW, Winston G, Schwarz JT et al (2018) Treatment of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations: A Single-Center Experience of 86 Patients and a Critique of the A Randomized Trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (ARUBA) Trial. World Neurosurg 120:e1156–e1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.025CrossRefPubMed

48.

Maalim AA, Zhu M, Shu K et al (2023) Microsurgical Treatment of Arteriovenous Malformations: A Single-Center Study Experience. Brain Sci 13(8):1183. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13081183CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Mascitelli JR, Yoon S, Cole TS, Kim H, Lawton MT (2018) Does eloquence subtype influence outcome following arteriovenous malformation surgery? J Neurosurg 131(3):876–883. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.4.JNS18403CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Nisson PL, Fard SA, Meybodi AT et al (2018) The Unique Features and Outcomes of Microsurgically Resected Cerebellar Arteriovenous Malformations. World Neurosurg 120:e940–e949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.08.194CrossRefPubMed

51.

O'Donnell JM, Al-Shahi Salman R, Manuguerra M, Assaad N, Morgan MK (2018) Quality of life and disability 12 months after surgery vs. conservative management for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations: Scottish population-based and Australian hospital-based studies. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 160(3):559–566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-017-3451-2CrossRefPubMed

52.

Oulasvirta E, Koroknay-Pál P, Hafez A, Elseoud AA, Lehto H, Laakso A (2019) Characteristics and Long-Term Outcome of 127 Children With Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations. Neurosurgery 84(1):151–159. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy008CrossRefPubMed

53.

Ozden M, Erdogan K, Bozkurt M (2023) Surgery in Intracerebral Arteriovenous Malformations: The Role of Preoperative Embolization. Turk Neurosurg 33(6):1078–1085. https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.44032-23.2CrossRefPubMed

54.

Ravindra VM, Bollo RJ, Eli IM et al (2019) A study of pediatric cerebral arteriovenous malformations: clinical presentation, radiological features, and long-term functional and educational outcomes with predictors of sustained neurological deficits. J Neurosurg Pediatr 24(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.2.PEDS18731CrossRefPubMed

55.

Riedel K, Thudium M, Boström A, Schramm J, Soehle M (2021) Controlled arterial hypotension during resection of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. BMC Neurol 21(1):339. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02362-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Rutledge C, Nelson J, Lu A et al (2020) Cost determinants in management of brain arteriovenous malformations. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 162(1):169–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-019-04134-6CrossRefPubMed

57.

Scherschinski L, Srinivasan VM, Karahalios K et al (2023) You Take the Low Road: Differential Outcomes After Tangential and Transcortical Approaches to Medial Temporal Brain Arteriovenous Malformations. World Neurosurg 173:e81–e90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.02.005CrossRefPubMed

58.

Sen RD, Nistal D, McGrath M et al (2022) De novo epilepsy after microsurgical resection of brain arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurg Focus 53(1):E6. https://doi.org/10.3171/2022.4.FOCUS2288CrossRefPubMed

59.

Smrcka M, Navratil O, Hovorka E, Duris K (2021) The efficacy of surgical treatment of cerebral arteriovenous malformations in a single academic institution: a case series. Croat Med J 62(4):353–359. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2021.62.353CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Song J, Li P, Tian Y et al (2021) One-Stage Treatment in a Hybrid Operation Room to Cure Brain Arteriovenous Malformation: A Single-Center Experience. World Neurosurg 147:e85–e97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.11.123CrossRefPubMed

61.

Stricker S, Boulouis G, Benichi S et al (2021) Acute surgical management of children with ruptured brain arteriovenous malformation. J Neurosurg Pediatr 27(4):437–445. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.8.PEDS20479CrossRefPubMed

62.

Wang A, Mandigo GK, Feldstein NA et al (2020) Curative treatment for low-grade arteriovenous malformations. J Neurointerv Surg 12(1):48–54. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015115CrossRefPubMed

63.

Wen J, Lu J, Wu X et al (2019) Combined Microsurgery and Endovascular Intervention in One-Stop for Treatment of Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformation: The Efficacy of a Hybrid Operation. Cell Transplant 28(8):1018–1024. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963689719845366CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Zeng C, Wang M, Song X et al (2022) Multimodal treatments of brain arteriovenous malformations: a comparison of microsurgical timings after endovascular embolization. Ann Transl Med 10(13):732. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-22-811CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Zhao DH, Xue R, Sun XR (2021) Quality improvement of nursing on patients with complex cerebral arteriovenous malformation undergoing hybrid surgery: a prospective single-center study. Chin Neurosurg J 7(1):23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-021-00240-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Zhu H, Zhang Y, Liang S et al (2022) Clinical Characteristics and Multimodality Therapy Outcomes in 304 Pediatric Patients with Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations. World Neurosurg 168:e150–e161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2022.09.064CrossRefPubMed

67.

Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, AGREE Next Steps Consortium (2016) The AGREE Reporting Checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ 352:i1152. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i1152CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

68.

Equator Network. How to develop a reporting guideline. https://www.equator-network.org/toolkits/developing-a-reporting-guideline/. Accessed 30 Jan 2024

69.

Goodman SN, Fanelli D, Ioannidis JP (2016) What does research reproducibility mean? Sci Transl Med 8(341):341ps12. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027CrossRefPubMed

70.

Baker M (2016) 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 533(7604):452–454. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452aCrossRefPubMed

71.

Paradis C (2008) Bias in surgical research. Ann Surg 248(2):180–188. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318176bf4bCrossRefPubMed

72.

Rauh S, Torgerson T, Johnson AL, Pollard J, Tritz D, Vassar M (2020) Reproducible and transparent research practices in published neurology research. Res Integr Peer Rev 5:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-0091-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

73.

Begley CG, Ioannidis JP (2015) Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ Res 116(1):116–126. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819CrossRefPubMed

74.

Dindo D, Clavien PA (2010) Quality assessment in surgery: mission impossible? Patient Saf Surg 4(1):18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1754-9493-4-18CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

75.

Ascha M, Katabi L, Stevens E, Gatherwright J, Vassar M (2022) Reproducible Research Practices in the Plastic Surgery Literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 149(4):810e–823e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008956CrossRefPubMed

76.

Lawton JS (2016) Reproducibility and replicability of science and thoracic surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 152(6):1489–1491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.08.044CrossRefPubMed

77.

Weyers S, Van Calenbergh S, Van Nieuwenhove Y, Mestdagh G, Coppens M, Bosteels J (2014) Quality assessment in surgery: where do we stand now and where should we be heading? Gynecol Surg 11:89–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-014-0839-3CrossRef

78.

Chowdhury AAM, Hussain MM (2020) Quality Assessment in Surgery- Conceptual Framework. J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg 38(2):93–97. https://doi.org/10.3329/jbcps.v38i2.45634CrossRef

79.

Riabec P, Šustickas G (2022) Addressing Problems in Reporting and Classification of Complications in Neurosurgery. Lietuvos chirurgija 21(3-4):196–201. https://doi.org/10.15388/LietChirur.2022.21.65CrossRef

80.

Brock S, Saleh C, Zekaj E, Servello D (2016) How to compare clinical results of different neurosurgical centers? Is a classification of complications in neurosurgery necessary for this purpose? Surg Neurol Int 7(Suppl 20):S565–S569. https://doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.188471CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

81.

Ziewacz JE, McGirt MJ, Chewning SJ Jr (2015) Adverse Events in Neurosurgery and Their Relationship to Quality Improvement. Neurosurg Clin N Am 26(2):157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2014.11.014CrossRefPubMed

82.

Broggi M, Zattra C, Ferroli P (2018) How to compare outcomes and complications in neurosurgery: We must make the mission possible! Surg Neurol Int 9:65. https://doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_424_17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

83.

Akram H, Mirza B, Kitchen N, Zakrzewska JM (2013) Proposal for evaluating the quality of reports of surgical interventions in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: the Surgical Trigeminal Neuralgia Score. Neurosurg Focus 35(3):E3. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.6.FOCUS13213CrossRefPubMed

84.

Meyers PM, Schumacher HC, Higashida RT et al (2009) Reporting standards for endovascular repair of saccular intracranial cerebral aneurysms. Stroke 40(5):e366–e379. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.527572CrossRefPubMed

85.

Cacciamani GE, Sholklapper T, Dell'Oglio P et al (2022) The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration Project: Development of Criteria for Reporting Adverse Events During Surgical Procedures and Evaluating Their Impact on the Postoperative Course. Eur Urol Focus 8(6):1847–1858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.01.018CrossRefPubMed

86.

Kougias P, Kaji AH, Boermeester M (2022) Practical Guide to Designing a Clinical Trial in Surgery. JAMA Surg 157(12):1152–1153. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2022.4883CrossRefPubMed

87.

Lawton MT, Kim H, McCulloch CE, Mikhak B, Young WL (2010) A supplementary grading scale for selecting patients with brain arteriovenous malformations for surgery. Neurosurgery 66(4):702–713. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000367555.16733.E1CrossRefPubMed

88.

Spetzler RF, Martin NA (1986) A proposed grading system for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 65(4):476–483. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1986.65.4.0476CrossRefPubMed

89.

Ioannidis JP (2016) The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Milbank Q 94(3):485–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12210CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Enhancing the quality of evidence, comparability, and reproducibility in brain arteriovenous malformations treated with open surgery research: a systematic review and proposal of a reporting guideline for surgical and clinical outcomes
Authors: Marcio Y. Ferreira
Lucas P. Mitre
Anthony E. Bishay
Sávio Batista
Lucca B. Palavani
Leonardo B. Oliveira
Gabriel Semione
Filipi F. Andreão
Silvio Porto Junior
Marcelo P. Sousa
Pedro G. L. B. Borges
Raphael Camerotte
Raphael Bertani
Michael T. Lawton
Eberval G. Figueiredo
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword: Brain Arteriovenous Malformation
Published in: Neurosurgical Review / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0344-5607
Electronic ISSN: 1437-2320
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-02422-z

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Enhancing the quality of evidence, comparability, and reproducibility in brain arteriovenous malformations treated with open surgery research: a systematic review and proposal of a reporting guideline for surgical and clinical outcomes

Abstract

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Impact of biologically effective dose on tremor decrease after stereotactic radiosurgical thalamotomy for essential tremor: a retrospective longitudinal analysis

Intraoperative ultrasound for surgical resection of high-grade glioma and glioblastoma: a meta-analysis of 732 patients

Letter to the editor: A nomogram based on radiomics and clinical information to predict prognosis in percutaneous balloon compression for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia

Letter to the Editor: Awake craniotomy during pregnancy: a systematic review of the published literature

Prediction of cerebral aneurysm rupture risk by machine learning algorithms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18,670 participants

Letter to the editor “effect of continuous hypertonic saline infusion on clinical outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury”