Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Clinical Management of Cavernous Malformations of the Brain and Spinal Cord: Consensus Recommendations Based on a Systematic Literature Review by the Alliance to Cure Cavernous Malformation Clinical Advisory Board Experts Panel.

BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVES

Despite many publications about cavernous malformations (CMs), controversy remains regarding diagnostic and management strategies. To update evidence-based guidelines for the clinical management of brain and spinal cord CMs.

METHODS

The Alliance to Cure CMs, the patient support group in the United States advocating on behalf of patients and research in CM, convened a multidisciplinary writing group comprising expert CM clinicians to help summarize the existing literature related to the clinical care of CM, focusing on 5 topics: (1) epidemiology and natural history, (2) genetic testing and counseling, (3) diagnostic criteria and imaging standards, (4) neurosurgical considerations, and (5) neurological considerations. Building on prior evidence-based recommendations reflecting literature review through October 2014, the group conducted a systematic review of the more recent literature, identified references for mandatory citation, rated evidence, developed recommendations, and established consensus according to a prespecified protocol. Finally, the writing group outlined remaining knowledge gaps and controversies to guide future research.

RESULTS

From 2672 publications published between October 1, 2014, and March 15, 2023, and meeting key word criteria, 234 were selected based on prearticulated criteria for mandatory consideration in evidence-based recommendations. Topic authors used these and other supporting references to summarize current knowledge and arrive at 53 management recommendations, with unanimous consensus based on a Delphi process. These were rated by class (strength of recommendation) and level (quality of evidence) per the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association criteria. Eighteen recommendations were class 1 (34%), class 2 in 31 (58%), and class 3 in 4 (8%). Three were level A (6%), 19 (36%) were level B, and 31 (58%) were level C.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence supports prior and new recommendations for the management of CMs, but many reflect moderate classes and low levels, mandating further research to better inform clinical practice.