Endovascular thrombectomy versus standard medical treatment for stroke patients with acute basilar artery occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Whether endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is superior to standard medical treatment (SMT) for stroke patients with acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) is uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of EVT with SMT for treating BAO patients. Papers were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was favorable functional outcomes at 3 months (defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of ≤3). A random effect model was used to calculate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) per outcome. Five articles, including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four observational cohort studies, comprising 1484 patients (1024 in the EVT group and 460 in the SMT group), were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated no significant differences between the EVT and SMT groups in achieving favorable functional outcomes at 3 months (RR=1.63, 95% CI 0.90, 2.96; p=0.11). However, patients in the EVT group had higher rates for symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (RR=6.22, 95% CI 2.06 to 18.76; p=0.001) but lower mortality at 3 months (RR=0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.91; p=0.007) than patients in the SMT group. Among patients with BAO, EVT and SMT did not differ significantly in achieving favorable functional outcomes at 3 months, but BAO patients treated with EVT might have lower mortality at 3 months. RCTs are warranted to further assess the efficacy and safety of EVT for BAO patients.