Vein of Galen Aneurysmal Malformations: Updates on Technical Aspects and Functional Outcomes Post-Endovascular Treatment—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Vein of Galen aneurysmal malformations (VGAMs) represent the most common vascular malformations of the brain at the pediatric age. Comprehension of its angioarchitecture and clinical features may influence their treatment options and functional outcomes. The aim of this review is to give an update of the anatomical and technical aspects of the management of VGAMs after endovascular treatment. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of original articles published between 1 January 2014 and 1 February 2024 in Pubmed, Web of Science (WOS), and Scopus databases following PRISMA guidelines. Variables such as age, sex, angioarchitecture of the malformation, clinical presentation, embolization technique, rate of occlusion, post-procedural complications, follow-up time, and mortality were collected. Random-effect meta-analysis of proportions was performed. Results: Fifteen studies on a total of 400 patients with VGAMs were collected. A total of 65.1% was male. The age at diagnosis was 12% prenatal, 35.5% neonates, 34.1% infants, 15.1% children, and 3.3% adults. Clinical presentation included 31.4% increased head size, 25.7% congestive heart failure, 12.9% neurological deficits, 10% seizures, 9.3% prominence of facial veins, and 8.9% developmental delay. A total of 339 patients underwent endovascular treatment (84.8%) with an average of 2.1 procedures per patient. The embolization technique was defined by transarterial access and glue material. Radiological occlusion was complete in 62.3% of the patients. The most frequent periprocedural incidents included hemorrhagic events (28.4%), embolization material migration (25.7%), and death (22%). The functional outcome was good in 68% of the surviving patients. The average follow-up time was 43.18 months. High heterogeneity was found in all outcomes but mortality rate. Conclusions: The angioarchitecture of VGAMs is significantly important when planning endovascular treatment and may have an influence on functional outcomes. More research into endovascular techniques and the risks of periprocedural complications must be performed. Indeed, a homogeneous protocol for the assessment of surviving VGAM patients during follow-up is necessary