4.1 Article

Diagnosis and treatment of vein of Galen aneurysmal malformations

期刊

CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM
卷 26, 期 7, 页码 879-887

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00381-009-1063-8

关键词

Vein of Galen aneurysmal malformations; Endovascular; In utero; Neonates; Heart failure

资金

  1. NIH [T32-NS007413]
  2. Philadelphia Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vein of Galen aneurysmal malformations (VGAM) are rare but clinically significant intracranial arteriovenous shunt lesions that most often present in neonates and infants. Retrospective clinical data were collected for patients evaluated with a diagnosis of VGAM from 1994 to 2007. Thirteen patients with VGAM were evaluated from 1994 to 2007. Seven patients presented emergently with medically intractable cardiac failure, and six were treated in the first 2 weeks of life. Five children treated after this period (1.5-31 months of age) manifested enlarging head circumference, abnormal development, or subarachnoid hemorrhage. Eleven patients were managed endovascularly. Four disease or procedure-related complications occurred. Two complications were associated with poor outcome, both of which occurred in patients treated at less than 2 weeks of age. Two other patients experienced transient neurological deficits with no evidence of permanent sequelae. Outcome in the six patients treated emergently in the first 2 weeks of life included two patients who developed normally, one with mild to moderate neurological deficits, one with severe neurological deficits, and two deaths. Outcome in the five older patients (treated between 1.5 and 31 months) was considerably better than in the group treated early and included three with normal outcome and two with mild neurological deficits. Contemporary endovascular techniques remain the preferred treatment for VGAM in all age groups. Early diagnosis and multimodality treatment are essential for the best management and treatment of the complex constellation of clinical problems often arising from this disorder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据