Variations and management for patients with craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas: Comparison of dural, radicular, and epidural arteriovenous fistulas

BACKGROUND: Craniocervical junction arteriovenous fistulas (CCJAVFs) are known to be rare, but variations and clinical behaviors remain controversial. METHODS: A total of 11 CCJAVF patients (M: F=9:2, age 54–77 years) were investigated. Based on the radiological and intraoperative findings, they were categorized into three types: dural AVF (DAVF), radicular AVF (RAVF), and epidural AVF (EDAVF). RESULTS: There were four symptomatic patients (subarachnoid hemorrhage in two, myelopathy in one, and tinnitus in one) and seven asymptomatic patients in whom coincidental CCJAVFs were discovered on imaging studies for other vascular diseases (arteriovenous malformation in one, intracranial DAVF in two, ruptured cerebral aneurysm in two, and carotid artery stenosis in two). Of these 11 patients, 2 (18.2%) had multiple CCJAVFs. Of 14 lesions, the diagnoses were DAVF in 5, RAVF in 3, and EDAVF in 6 (C1–C2 level ratio =5:0, 2:1, 3:3). Patients with DAVF/RAVF in four lesions with intradural venous reflux underwent surgery, although an RAVF remained in one lesion after embolization/radiation. Since all six EDAVFs, two DAVFs, and one RAVF had neither feeder aneurysms nor significant symptoms, no treatment was provided; of these nine lesions, one DAVF and one RAVF remained unchanged, whereas six EDAVFs showed spontaneous obliteration within a year. Unfortunately, however, one DAVF bled before elective surgery. CONCLUSION: CCJAVFs have many variations of shunting site, angioarchitecture, and multiplicity, and they were frequently associated with coincidental vascular lesions. For symptomatic DAVF/RAVF lesions with intradural drainage, surgery is preferred, whereas asymptomatic EDAVFs without dangerous drainage may obliterate during their natural course.