Long-term outcomes of microsurgery and stereotactic radiosurgery as the first-line treatment for arteriovenous malformations: a propensity score-matched analysis using nationwide multicenter prospective registry data

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the risk and benefit profile of microsurgery (MS) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) as the first-line treatment for unruptured and ruptured arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: The authors included AVMs underwent MS or SRS as the first-line treatment from a nationwide prospective multicenter registry in mainland China. The authors used propensity score-matched methods to balance baseline characteristics between the MS and SRS groups. The primary outcomes were long-term hemorrhagic stroke or death, and the secondary outcomes were long-term obliteration and neurological outcomes. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses with different study designs were performed to confirm the stability of our findings. Results: Of the 4286 consecutive AVMs in the registry from August 2011 to December 2021; 1604 patients were eligible. After matching, 244 unruptured and 442 ruptured AVMs remained for the final analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 7.0 years in the unruptured group and 6.1 years in the ruptured group. In the comparison of primary outcomes, SRS was associated with a higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke or death both in the unruptured and ruptured AVMs (unruptured: hazard ratio 4.06, 95% CI: 1.15–14.41; ruptured: hazard ratio 4.19, 95% CI: 1.58–11.15). In terms of the secondary outcomes, SRS was also observed to have a significant disadvantage in long-term obliteration [unruptured: odds ratio (OR) 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00–0.04; ruptured: OR 0.09, 95% CI: 0.05–0.15]. However, it should be noted that SRS may have advantages in preventing neurofunctional decline (unruptured: OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.27–1.14; ruptured: OR 0.41, 95% CI: 0.23–0.76). The results of subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were consistent in trend but with slightly varied powers. Conclusions: This clinical practice-based real-world study comprehensively compared MS and SRS for AVMs with long-term outcomes. MS is more effective in preventing future hemorrhage or death and achieving obliteration, while the risk of neurofunctional decline should not be ignored.