• Kareem El Naamani, Ching-Jen Chen, Roland Jabre, Hassan Saad, Jonathan A Grossberg, Adam A Dmytriw, Aman B Patel, Mirhojjat Khorasanizadeh, Christopher S Ogilvy, Ajith Thomas, Andre Monteiro, Adnan Siddiqui, Gustavo M Cortez, Ricardo A Hanel, Guilherme Porto, Alejandro M Spiotta, Anthony J Piscopo, David M Hasan, Mohammad Ghorbani, Joshua Weinberg, Shahid M Nimjee, Kimon Bekelis, Mohamed M Salem, Jan-Karl Burkhardt, Akli Zetchi, Charles Matouk, Brian M Howard, Rosalind Lai, Rose Du, Rawad Abbas, Georgios S Sioutas, Abdelaziz Amllay, Alfredo Munoz, Elias Atallah, Nabeel A Herial, Stavropoula I Tjoumakaris, Michael Reid Gooch, Robert H Rosenwasser, and Pascal Jabbour.
• Neurosurgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
• J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 2024 Feb 14; 95 (3): 256263256-263.

BackgroundMoyamoya is a chronic occlusive cerebrovascular disease of unknown etiology causing neovascularization of the lenticulostriate collaterals at the base of the brain. Although revascularization surgery is the most effective treatment for moyamoya, there is still no consensus on the best surgical treatment modality as different studies provide different outcomes.ObjectiveIn this large case series, we compare the outcomes of direct (DR) and indirect revascularisation (IR) and compare our results to the literature in order to reflect on the best revascularization modality for moyamoya.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter retrospective study in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology guidelines of moyamoya affected hemispheres treated with DR and IR surgeries across 13 academic institutions predominantly in North America. All patients who underwent surgical revascularization of their moyamoya-affected hemispheres were included in the study. The primary outcome of the study was the rate of symptomatic strokes.ResultsThe rates of symptomatic strokes across 515 disease-affected hemispheres were comparable between the two cohorts (11.6% in the DR cohort vs 9.6% in the IR cohort, OR 1.238 (95% CI 0.651 to 2.354), p=0.514). The rate of total perioperative strokes was slightly higher in the DR cohort (6.1% for DR vs 2.0% for IR, OR 3.129 (95% CI 0.991 to 9.875), p=0.052). The rate of total follow-up strokes was slightly higher in the IR cohort (8.1% vs 6.6%, OR 0.799 (95% CI 0.374 to 1.709) p=0.563).ConclusionSince both modalities showed comparable rates of overall total strokes, both modalities of revascularization can be performed depending on the patient's risk assessment.© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

12 keywords...

hide…