ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2025
Vertebral-Venous fistulas: Single center experience and practical treatment approach.
Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cervical vertebral-venous fistula with neurofibromatosis presenting as myelopathy: A case report and literature review.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2025Article
- Vertebro-Vertebral Arteriovenous Fistulae: A Case Series of Endovascular Management at a Single Center.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Case Report: Vertebro-vertebral arteriovenous fistula showing symptoms mimicking ALS: Diagnostic imaging supports accurate differentiation between ALS and mimicking conditions.F1000Research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundVertebral-venous fistulas (VVFs) are rare. Scarce literature exists to guide our understanding and management. We report our experience and propose a classification based on flow, feeder number, and involvement of accessible veins. Additionally, we include a practical treatment approach.MethodsRetrospective chart and imaging review of cerebrovascular arteriovenous fistulas treated in our center between July 2013 and April 2022. We reviewed patient demographics, presentation, imaging, treatment strategies, and outcomes.ResultsNine patients with VVFs were identified, six were females. Ages ranged between 38-83 years. There were six high-flow and three low-flow. Most VVFs originated at the level of V3. Additional feeders from the internal carotid artery, external carotid artery, and/or subclavian artery were present in four cases (two were high-flow). Four cases had multiple arterial feeders. All cases were symptomatic. Origin was spontaneous in eight and iatrogenic in one case. Most common presenting symptoms were pain (7) and pulsatile tinnitus (4). Neurological deficits were present in two cases (1 high- and 1 low-flow). Four cases were treated with vertebral artery segmental sacrifice alone, three required multiple transarterial embolizations with or without VA sacrifice, one case had single transvenous approach, and one was treated with single targeted transarterial embolization. One patient had a minor transient neurological complication. No treatment-related mortality was seen.ConclusionTreatment of high-flow and symptomatic low-flow VVFs is feasible and safe. Our classification and treatment approach might help guide patient selection and choice of endovascular approach. However, our approach warrants further validation with a larger number of patients.
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.