SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019
Interventions for treating brain arteriovenous malformations in adults.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk of intracranial hemorrhage in brain arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Long-term complications and outcomes of therapeutic embolization of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2024Pooled it
- Arteriovenous Malformations (AVMs): Molecular Pathogenesis, Clinical Features, and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Interventional Treatment vs Conservative Management of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations.JAMA network open · 2025Observational
- Case Study of a Complex Neurovascular Disorder: Choroidal Arteriovenous Malformation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- National reduction in cerebral arteriovenous malformation treatment correlated with increased rupture incidence.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Article
- Endothelial Rbpj deletion normalizes Notch4-induced brain arteriovenous malformation in mice.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2023Article
- Transvenous embolization of hemorrhagic brain arteriovenous malformations: Case reports and literature review.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Targeted endovascular treatment for ruptured brain arteriovenous malformations.Neurosurgical review · 2020Review
- What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about congenital vascular anomalies and hemangiomas? A narrative review.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaReview
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBrain arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are the single most common cause of intracerebral haemorrhage in young adults. Brain AVMs also cause seizure(s) and focal neurological deficits (in the absence of haemorrhage, migraine or an epileptic seizure); approximately one-fifth are incidental discoveries. Various interventions are used in an attempt to eradicate brain AVMs: neurosurgical excision, stereotactic radiosurgery, endovascular embolization, and staged combinations of these interventions. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006, and last updated in 2009.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness and safety of the different interventions, alone or in combination, for treating brain AVMs in adults compared against either each other, or conservative management, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). SEARCH
methodsThe Cochrane Stroke Group Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 7 January 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid (1980 to 14 January 2019), and Embase OVID (1980 to 14 January 2019). We searched international registers of clinical trials, the contents pages of relevant journals, and bibliographies of relevant articles (November 2009). We also contacted manufacturers of interventional treatments for brain AVMs (March 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought RCTs of any intervention for brain AVMs (used alone or in combination), compared against each other or against conservative management, with relevant clinical outcome measures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One author screened the results of the updated searches for potentially eligible RCTs for this updated review. Both authors independently read the potentially eligible RCTs in full and confirmed their inclusion according to the inclusion criteria. We resolved disagreement by discussion. We assessed the risk of bias in included studies and applied GRADE. MAIN
resultsWe included one trial with 226 participants: A Randomized trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (ARUBA), comparing intervention versus conservative management for unruptured brain AVMs (that had never bled). The quality of evidence was moderate because we found just one trial that was at low risk of bias other than a high risk of performance bias due to participants and treating physicians not being blinded to allocated treatment. Data on functional outcome and death at a follow-up of 12 months were provided for 218 (96%) of the participants in ARUBA. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), intervention compared to conservative management increased death or dependency (modified Rankin Scale score ≥ 2, risk ratio (RR) 2.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 4.98; 1 trial, 226 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and the proportion of participants with symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (RR 6.75, 95% CI 2.07 to 21.96; 1 trial, 226 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but there was no difference in the frequency of epileptic seizures (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.06; 1 trial, 226 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Three RCTs are ongoing. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe found moderate-quality evidence from one RCT including adults with unruptured brain AVMs that conservative management was superior to intervention with respect to functional outcome and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage over one year after randomization. More RCTs will help to confirm or refute these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.