ReviewCureus2026
Comparative Outcomes of Surgical, Endovascular, Radiosurgical, and Multimodal Management of Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) pose significant therapeutic challenges, with multiple modalities offering varying degrees of cure, risk, and functional preservation. Although microsurgery, endovascular embolization, stereotactic radiosurgery, and multimodal approaches are widely used, comparative outcomes remain heterogeneous. This systematic review synthesizes contemporary evidence across treatment strategies to guide patient-specific decision-making. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and a registered International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews protocol (CRD420251066493), PubMed, MyEBSCO, and Embase were searched to June 1, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized trials, cohort studies, and case series (≥10 patients) reporting clinical outcomes after AVM treatment. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment (Risk of Bias 2, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, National Institutes of Health tool). Qualitative synthesis was conducted due to substantial heterogeneity. A total of 135 studies involving 27,541 patients were included. Microsurgery achieved 78%-100% obliteration, with complication rates 6.8%-60% and mortality 0%-13.3%. Embolization demonstrated variable obliteration (13%-92%) and complications (14%-25%), with mortality (0%-2%), supporting its role primarily as an adjunct. Multimodal strategies yielded 85%-100% obliteration, 7%-36% complications, and 0%-5% mortality, with hybrid workflows showing the most favorable balance. Radiosurgery produced 22%-100% obliteration, excellent functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale 0-2 in 80%-95%), and the lowest contemporary mortality (0%-1%). Optimal AVM management depends on individualized selection and modality sequencing rather than a single superior technique. Microsurgery provides immediate cure in suitable cases, radiosurgery offers durable long-term outcomes, and embolization enhances both when applied judiciously. Multimodal and hybrid approaches combine these strengths, achieving high cure rates with acceptable morbidity.
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.