J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2017; 78(04): 321-328
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1592420
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Neuropsychological Performance after Brain Arteriovenous Malformations Treatment

Ondrej Bradac
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, Military University Hospital and Charles University, First Medical Faculty, Prague, Czech Republic
Alice Pulkrabkova
2   Department of Psychology, Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
Patricia de Lacy
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Vladimir Benes
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, Military University Hospital and Charles University, First Medical Faculty, Prague, Czech Republic
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

21 September 2015

20 July 2016

Publication Date:
11 November 2016 (online)


Background The treatment of brain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) has been studied extensively. With the use of the Spetzler-Martin (S-M) grading system, patients can be informed appropriately about their possible surgical risks. This does not hold true for their neuropsychological sequelae, which have not been studied widely. We evaluated the neuropsychological outcome of our patients treated for brain AVMs.

Methods Of 113 patients treated for a brain AVM between 2001 and 2009, 66 patients were enrolled in the study. All patients underwent treatment at our institution and neuropsychological testing 2 years later using a test battery constructed specifically for this study. A control group consisted of 10 subjects without any neurologic disease.

Results When the whole cohort was analyzed, no significant differences were found between the groups distinguished by hemorrhage, gender, or hemispheric dominance. Patients with S-M IV and V scores fared significantly worse than patients with S-M I to III. Patients who presented with epilepsy scored lower than patients presenting with other symptomatology, but the difference had only borderline significance. When we analyzed patients according to the presence or absence of obliteration after treatment and compared these with the control group, we found no significant differences. When the patients with an obliterated AVM after treatment were subdivided according to treatment modality, there were no significant differences in their S-M groups compared with the control group. Similarly, those patients with nonobliterated AVMs analyzed according to their S-M grade showed a borderline significant difference, with S-M IV and V having a worse neuropsychological outcome compared with the other groups.

Conclusions Patients harboring nonobliterated high-grade AVMs (S-M IV and V) scored worse than patients with nonobliterated AVM S-M grades I to III. This could be explained by the steal phenomenon. No differences in neuropsychological testing were found when comparing results according to nidus location. This study lends support to an active treatment policy for cerebral AVMs. Those patients in whom complete obliteration was achieved with treatment scored similarly to the background population, implying active AVM treatment does not cause deterioration in neuropsychological performance. This, together with a > 90% AVM obliteration rate, favors microsurgery as the treatment modality of choice whenever the AVM can be safely resected.

  • References

  • 1 Moftakhar P, Hauptman JS, Malkasian D, Martin NA. Cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Part 2: physiology. Neurosurg Focus 2009; 26 (05) E11
  • 2 Al-Shahi R, Bhattacharya JJ, Currie DG. , et al; Scottish Intracranial Vascular Malformation Study Collaborators. Prospective, population-based detection of intracranial vascular malformations in adults: the Scottish Intracranial Vascular Malformation Study (SIVMS). Stroke 2003; 34 (05) 1163-1169
  • 3 Al-Shahi R, Warlow C. A systematic review of the frequency and prognosis of arteriovenous malformations of the brain in adults. Brain 2001; 124 (Pt 10): 1900-1926
  • 4 Spetzler RF, Martin NA. A proposed grading system for arteriovenous malformations. J Neurosurg 1986; 65 (04) 476-483
  • 5 Andersen EB, Petersen J, Mortensen EL, Udesen H. Conservatively treated patients with cerebral arteriovenous malformation: mental and physical outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988; 51 (09) 1208-1212
  • 6 Mahalick DM, Ruff RM, Heary RF, U. HS. Preoperative versus postoperative neuropsychological sequelae of arteriovenous malformations. Neurosurgery 1993; 33 (04) 563-570 ; discussion 570–571
  • 7 Stabell KE, Nornes H. Prospective neuropsychological investigation of patients with supratentorial arteriovenous malformations. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1994; 131 (1–2): 32-44
  • 8 Marshall GA, Jonker BP, Morgan MK, Taylor AJ. Prospective study of neuropsychological and psychosocial outcome following surgical excision of intracerebral arteriovenous malformations. J Clin Neurosci 2003; 10 (01) 42-47
  • 9 Váňa J, Hrabal V. VIT (Váňův inteligenční test). Bratislava: Psychodiagnostické a didaktické testy; 1975
  • 10 Preiss M, Rodriguez M, Kawaciuková R. et al. Neuropsychologická baterie Psychiatrického centra Praha. Praha: Psychiatrické centrum Praha; 2007
  • 11 Říčan P. Test intelektového potenciálu (TIP). Bratislava: Psychodiagnostické a didaktické testy; 1971
  • 12 Warrington EV, James M. The Visual Object and Space Perception Battery Praha Testcentrum. 2002
  • 13 Baker RP, McCarter RJ, Porter DG. Improvement in cognitive function after right temporal arteriovenous malformation excision. Br J Neurosurg 2004; 18 (05) 541-544
  • 14 Carter LP, Morgan M, Urrea D. Psychological improvement following arteriovenous malformation excision. Case report. J Neurosurg 1975; 42 (04) 452-456
  • 15 Dikel TN, Fennell EB, Nadeau SE, Quisling RG, Mickle JP, Friedman WA. A neuropsychological outcome study of a child's left pericallosal arteriovenous malformation with occult fornix lesion. Neurocase 2001; 7 (06) 503-513
  • 16 Mohr JP, Parides MK, Stapf C. , et al; international ARUBA investigators. Medical management with or without interventional therapy for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA): a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial. Lancet 2014; 383 (9917): 614-621
  • 17 Bradac O, Charvat F, Benes V. Treatment for brain arteriovenous malformation in the 1998-2011 period and review of the literature. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2013; 155 (02) 199-209
  • 18 La Piana R, Bourassa-Blanchette S, Klein D, Mok K, Del Pilar Cortes Nino M, Tampieri D. Brain reorganization after endovascular treatment in a patient with a large arteriovenous malformation: the role of diagnostic and functional neuroimaging techniques. Interv Neuroradiol 2013; 19 (03) 329-338
  • 19 Madl C, Grimm G, Kramer L. , et al. Cognitive brain function in non-demented patients with low-grade and high-grade carotid artery stenosis. Eur J Clin Invest 1994; 24 (08) 559-564
  • 20 King GD, Gideon DA, Haynes CD, Dempsey RL, Jenkins CW. Intellectual and personality changes associated with carotid endarterectomy. J Clin Psychol 1977; 33 (01) 215-220
  • 21 De Leo D, Serraiotto L, Pellegrini C, Magni G, Franceschi L, Deriu GP. Outcome from carotid endarterectomy. Neuropsychological performances, depressive symptoms and quality of life: 8-month follow-up. Int J Psychiatry Med 1987; 17 (04) 317-325
  • 22 Uclés P, Almárcegui C, Lorente S, Romero F, Marco M. Evaluation of cerebral function after carotid endarterectomy. J Clin Neurophysiol 1997; 14 (03) 242-249
  • 23 Tooze A, Hiles CL, Sheehan JP. Neurocognitive changes in pituitary adenoma patients after gamma knife radiosurgery: a preliminary study. World Neurosurg 2012; 78 (1–2): 122-128
  • 24 Nakazaki K, Kano H. Evaluation of mini-mental status examination score after gamma knife radiosurgery as the first radiation treatment for brain metastases. J Neurooncol 2013; 112 (03) 421-425
  • 25 Guo WY, Lee SM, Chang YC, Pan HC. The impact of arteriovenous malformation radiosurgery on the brain: From morphology and perfusion to neurocognition. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2006; 84 (04) 162-169