Cited by 540Vascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentVascular Malformations and HemangiomasVascular Anomalies and Treatments

Bragg-peak proton-beam therapy for arteriovenous malformations of the brain

Kjellberg, Raymond N., Hanamura, Tetsu, Davis, Kenneth R., Lyons, Susan L., Adams, Raymond D.·1983·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Patients with arteriovenous malformations of the brain, who are subject to disabling or fatal recurrent hemorrhage, seizures, severe headache, and progressive neurologic deficits, may be considered unsuitable for conventional therapies (craniotomy with excision or embolization), usually because of the location, size, or operative risk of the lesion. We have treated such patients with stereotactic Bragg-peak proton-beam therapy and report the follow-up of 74 of the first 75, 2 to 16 years after treatment. Proton-beam therapy is intended to induce subendothelial deposition of collagen and hyaline substance, which narrows the lumens of small vessels and thickens the walls of the malformation during the first 12 to 24 months after the procedure. Two deaths from hemorrhage occurred in the first 12 months after treatment, but no lethal or disabling hemorrhages occurred after this interval. Seizures, headaches, and progressive neurologic deficits were in most cases arrested or improved. Bragg-peak proton-beam therapy appears to be a useful technique for treatment of intracranial arteriovenous malformations, especially those that are unsuitable for treatment by other methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm198308043090503

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ionizing radiation can damage the CNS, causing changes to cognitive function, inducing fatigue, and generating performance decrements.

    “Ionizing radiation can damage the CNS, causing changes to cognitive function, inducing fatigue, and generating performance decrements [2,30,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kjellberg, R. N., Hanamura, T., Davis, K. R., Lyons, S. L., & Adams, R. D.
Affiliations
Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1983-08-04
Volume
309
Issue
5
Pages
269-274
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W3026529836
Cited by
540
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 14
FWCI
8.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Vascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Vascular Malformations and Hemangiomas
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Vascular Anomalies and Treatments
Keywords
intracranial arteriovenous malformations, stereotactic radiotherapy, hemorrhage recurrence, seizures, neurological deficit, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Cerebral Angiography, Intracranial Arteriovenous Malformations, Cerebral Hemorrhage, Child, Child, Preschool, Craniotomy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Headache, Humans, Methods, Protons, Radiotherapy, Seizures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review