Abstract
Background
Acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) is a severe disease that is associated with an 85% mortality rate if untreated. Several studies have analyzed the use of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in the different scenarios of BAO. However, the results remain conflicting and the role of MT as standard of care for vertebrobasilar tandem occlusions (VBTO) has not been confirmed. Our goal was to assess technical feasibility, safety, and functional outcome of endovascular treatment of VBTO in comparison to isolated BAO (IBAO).
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed all prospectively collected patients with acute BAO from six tertiary centers between September 2016 and November 2021. Patients were subsequently divided into two groups: VBTO and IBAO. Baseline data, procedural details, and outcomes were compared between groups.
Results
A total of 190 patients were included, 55 presenting with a VBTO and 135 with IBAO. Successful recanalization was equally common in both groups (89.1% and 86.0%). Rates of favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale: 0–2) were higher in patients with VBTO compared to IBAO (36.4% vs. 25.2%, p = 0.048) and mortality was lower (29.1% vs. 33.3%). However, these associations faded after adjustment for confounders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.35–2.05; aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.35–2.45). Rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage did not differ between the groups (VBTO: 7.3% vs. IBAO: 4.2%; p = 0.496).
Conclusion
Endovascular treatment of VBTO is technically feasible and safe with similar rates of successful recanalization, favorable functional outcome, and mortality to those in patients with IBAO.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
