Endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion due to different stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis and cardioembolism

Abstract

Introduction:

Stroke etiology may affect the prognosis of acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO). This study aimed to estimate the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment (EVT) in BAO strokes due to the underlying stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) and cardioembolism (CE).

Patients and methods:

Patients with LAA and CE subtypes from the registry EVT for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion Study (BASILAR) were selected for this analysis. We estimated the EVT treatment effect relative to standard medical treatment (SMT) in these patients by using a propensity score approach with inverse probability of treatment weighted estimation. Outcomes included 90-day favorable functional outcomes (modified Rankin scale (mRS) 0–3), functional independence (mRS 0–2), all-cause mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH).

Results:

A total of 744 patients were included in the final analysis. After weighting with inverse probability of treatment estimation, the patients who, based on their characteristics, were treated with EVT rather than SMT, demonstrated higher rates of favorable functional outcomes in both the LAA (29.2% vs 11.7%, adjusted OR with 95% CI: 4.34 [2.15–8.78], p < 0.001) and the CE subtype (36.0% vs 8.1%, adjusted OR with 95% CI: 9.14 [1.96–42.55], p = 0.005). A similar finding was also observed for functional independence. EVT patients also demonstrated lower rates of mortality than SMT. Among EVT patients, no significant difference was observed in mortality or sICH between LAA and CE groups, but LAA patients had lower rates of favorable functional outcome and functional independence (29.2% vs 37% and 24.2% vs 32.9%, respectively), where the latter remained significant after adjustment for imbalances in baseline data (p = 0.04).

Conclusions:

In acute BAO strokes, both LAA and CE patients who, based on their characteristics, were treated with EVT rather than SMT, demonstrated better outcomes. Among EVT patients, LAA and CE subtypes displayed important baseline and treatment differences, and LAA patients were less likely to achieve functional independence at 3 months, but mortality and sICH were similar between LAA or CE subtypes. These results need to be confirmed in future clinical trials.

Keywords

Basilar artery occlusion endovascular treatment stroke etiology outcome

Introduction

Acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) is a devastating stroke subtype, and nearly 80% of patients with BAO have poor outcomes if not recanalized.¹ Endovascular therapy (EVT) has become the current guideline-recommended standard treatment for both anterior-circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes and BAO strokes^2,3 despite of limited evidence in treating BAO strokes.^1,4,5 Nevertheless, a recent large-scale, prospective, multicenter cohort demonstrated the benefit of EVT for BAO in clinical practice.⁶

Large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) and cardioembolism (CE) are the most common etiologies of posterior circulation strokes of LVO subtype.^7,8 Because the underlying mechanism of BAO varies, the outcome might be different. Several studies have estimated the effects of causes of BAO strokes and outcomes, but the results were inconsistent. Some studies showed that after EVT, patients with BAO from embolism (from cardiac or large arteries) had a better outcome than those from intracranial atherosclerotic disease or in situ atherosclerotic thrombosis. Other studies showed that the outcomes were similar.^9–14 Overall, these studies were limited due to their retrospective nature and small sample sizes, and inconsistent etiology classification. Moreover, these studies did not compare EVT to standard medical treatment (SMT), or explore whether stroke etiology might modify the effect of EVT.

In this study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of EVT compared with SMT in patients with BAO from LAA or CE. Furthermore, we identified the association between stroke etiology and outcomes in patients with acute BAO who received EVT.

Patients and methods

Study design

The BASILAR was a multicentre, prospective, registry study conducted in 47 comprehensive stroke centers across 15 provinces in China from January 2014 to May 2019. Consecutive patients >18 years old who presented with an acute BAO stroke within 24 h from the onset were recruited into two groups: treatment with EVT plus SMT or SMT alone. Details on the rationale, design, and major results of the BASILAR study have been published previously.⁶ The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, China, and each subcenter. All patients or their legally authorized representatives signed the informed consent. The trial was registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn, and the registration number was ChiCTR1800014759.

Treatments

Patients in the SMT group received intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) or urokinase if appropriate and antithrombosis drugs in accordance to the guidelines of acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) management.¹⁵ Patients in the EVT group received treatment with stent retrievers, thromboaspiration, balloon angioplasty, stenting, intra-arterial thrombolysis, or various combinations of these approaches. Balloon angioplasty and stenting were regarded as rescue treatments if recanalization was not achieved after multiple attempts with stent retrievers, thromboaspiration, or intra-arterial thrombolysis. In a minority of cases, angioplasty or stenting was the first strategy.

Data collection

Baseline data were collected as follows: demographics, medical history, clinical measures, stroke severity, imaging profiles, and treatment features. According to the Trial of ORG10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) criteria,¹⁶ only those strokes with a presumed causative mechanism of LAA and CE were included in this study. The LAA subtype was defined as acute in situ atherosclerotic thrombo-occlusion in the basilar artery or the V4 segment of the vertebral artery after excluding cardiac source or other etiologies. The existence of multiple or diffuse atherosclerotic lesions in the other large arteries further supported the diagnosis. Distal embolism due to severe stenosis of the proximal vertebral artery was also considered as LAA. The CE subtype manifests an abrupt obstruction with obvious evidence of embolism from cardiac sources detected by cardiac examination: atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, cardiac mural thrombus, cardiomyopathy, intracardiac tumors, etc. The baseline ischemic changes were assessed according to the posterior circulation Acute Stroke Prognosis Early Computed Tomography Score (pc-ASPECTS) on CT imaging.¹⁷ Neurological deficits were evaluated by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Stroke severity at baseline was dichotomized into severe or mild to moderate as described previously.⁶ Collateral status was assessed using the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology (ASITN/SIR) collateral grading system and classified into scores of 0–1, 2, and 3–4.^18,19 Recanalization status was assessed by the modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) and classified from no perfusion (grade 0) to complete perfusion (grade 3). Grade 2b/3 was generally regarded as successful reperfusion.²⁰

Outcome assessment

The primary efficacy outcome was favorable functional outcome defined as 0–3 on the mRS at 90 days. The secondary efficacy outcome was functional independence (mRS score of 0–2) at 90 days. Safety outcomes included all-cause mortality within 90 days, intracranial hemorrhages (ICH) and symptomatic ICH (sICH) within 48 h confirmed by CT scans or magnetic resonance imaging. ICH was evaluated according to the Heidelberg Bleeding Classification,²¹ and sICH was defined as a new ICH with an increase in NIHSS score of ⩾4, or an NIHSS score of ⩾2 points in one category or deterioration that led to intubation, hemicraniectomy, external ventricular drain placement, or any other major interventions.

Statistical analysis

The baseline variables were compared between groups using the χ² test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables. Continuous variables are expressed as medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), and categorical data are presented as frequencies and proportions. Moreover, baseline variables were compared using standardized mean difference (SMD). In this study, we used a propensity score approach to estimate the treatment effect. According to the previous evidence and guideline recommendations,^2,22,23 ASPECTS and occlusion sites were the important factors that related to the decision of whether to undergo EVT or not and considered as a part of treatment group “features.” Based on this assumption, ASPECTS and occlusion sites would not be included as adjustment covariates. The propensity score for the EVT group was generated for each patient regardless of the outcome by using a nonparsimonious multivariable logistic regression model with all covariates in Table 1 except for ASPECTS score and occlusion sites included in the model. The spread of propensity score for each of the subgroups was calculated and expressed as mean ± SD (Supplemental Table 1), and the histogram of propensity score was shown in Supplemental Figure 1. Inverse probability of treatment weighted estimation was then defined as the inverse of the estimated propensity score for EVT patients, and the inverse of one minus the estimated propensity score for those with SMT. The association of treatment modality with clinical outcomes in LAA and CE subgroups were assessed using a logistic regression model with inverse probability of treatment weighting. The estimates of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. The heterogeneity of the EVT effect across LAA and CE subgroups was estimated by introducing an interaction term between treatment modality and stroke etiology (LAA vs CE) into the model.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics according to the LAA and CE of stroke subtype.

	LAA			p-Value	SMD	CE			p-Value	SMD
	ALL (n = 539)	Control (n = 121)	EVT (n = 418)	p-Value	SMD	ALL (n = 205)	Control (n = 32)	EVT (n = 173)	p-Value	SMD
Age, y, median (IQR)	63 (57–71)	66(59–74.5)	63 (56–70)	0.001	0.342	71 (62–78)	73.5 (57–80)	71 (63–78)	0.55	0.091
Sex, male, n (%)	431/539 (80)	86/121 (71.1)	345/418 (82.5)	0.006	0.274	121/205 (59)	20/32 (62.5)	101/173(58.4)	0.66	0.084
Blood pressure on admission, mmHg, median (IQR)
Systolic	154 (140–171)	160 (144.5–173.5)	152 (138–170)	0.02	0.198	146 (127–163)	153.5 (132v170.8)	144 (126.5–162)	0.06	0.454
Diastolic	87 (79–98)	90 (80–98)	86 (79–98)	0.33	0.045	84 (77–95.5)	90 (83–100)	83 (75.5–94)	0.02	0.356
Baseline NIHSS score, median (IQR)	25 (16–32)	24 (15–32)	25 (16–32)	0.53	0.08	30 (18–34)	29.5 (16–32)	30 (19.5–34)	0.36	0.171
Medical history, n (%)
Hypertension	418/539 (77.6)	102/121 (84.3)	316/418 (75.6)	0.04	0.219	132/205 (64.4)	18/32 (56.3)	114/173 (65.9)	0.30	0.199
Hyperlipidemia	214/539 (39.7)	49/121 (40.5)	165/418 (39.5)	0.84	0.021	49/205 (23.9)	10/32 (31.3)	39/173 (22.5)	0.29	0.197
Diabetes	144/539 (26.7)	30/121 (24.8)	114/418 (27.3)	0.59	0.057	37/205 (18)	4/32 (12.5)	33/173 (19.1)	0.46	0.181
Smoking	220/539 (40.8)	34/121 (28.1)	186/418 (44.5)	0.001	0.346	40/205 (19.5)	3/32(9.4)	37/173 (21.4)	0.15	0.338
Atrial fibrillation	3/539 (0.6)	0/121 (0)	3/418 (0.7)	1	0.12	152/205 (74.1)	22/32 (68.8)	130/173 (75.1)	0.45	0.143
Ischemic stroke	141/539 (26.2)	35/121 (28.9)	106/418 (25.4)	0.43	0.08	32/205 (15.6)	5/32 (15.6)	27/173 (15.6)	>0.99	<0.001
Baseline pc-ASPECT, median (IQR)	8 (6–9)	7 (6–8)	8 (7–9)	0.00	0.415	8 (7–10)	7 (7–8)	8 (7–10)	0.01	0.471
ASITN/SIR grade, n (%)				0.66					0.21
0–1	316/539 (58.6)	70/121 (57.9)	246/418 (58.9)		0.020	138/205 (67.3)	24/32 (75)	114/173 (65.9)		0.20
2	147/539 (27.3)	31/121 (25.6)	116/418 (27.8)		0.050	42/205 (20.5)	3/32 (9.4)	39/173 (22.5)		0.364
3–4	76/539 (14.1)	20/121 (16.5)	56/418 (13.4)		0.087	25/205 (12.2)	5/32 (15.6)	20/173 (11.6)		0.117
Stroke severity, n (%)				0.42	0.083				0.94	0.014
Mild to moderate	132/539 (24.5)	33/121 (27.3)	99/418 (23.7)			82/205 (40)	13/32 (40.6)	69/173 (39.9)
Severe	407/539 (75.5)	88/121 (72.7)	319/418 (76.3)			123/205 (60)	19/32 (59.4)	104/173 (60.1)
Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio	7.9 (4.9–12.3)	7.8 (4.8–12.1)	7.9 (4.9–12.4)	0.57	0.009	7.3 (4.7–12.4)	7.1 (4.9–12.4)	7.4 (4.6–2.4)	0.71	0.202
Occlusion site, n (%)				0.00					0.04
Distal basilar artery	78/539 (14.5)	13/121 (10.7)	65/418 (15.6)		0.145	151/205 (73.7)	20/32 (62.5)	131/173 (75.7)		0.289
Middle basilar artery	234/539 (43.4)	80/121 (66.1)	154/418 (36.8)		0.613	35/205 (17.1)	11/32 (34.5)	24/173 (13.9)		0.496
Proximal basilar artery	104/539 (19.3)	10/121 (8.3)	94/418 (22.5)		0.401	10/205 (4.9)	1/32 (3.1)	9/173 (5.2)		0.105
Vertebral artery-V4 segment	123/539 (22.8)	18/121 (14.9)	105/418 (25.1)		0.257	9/205 (4.4)	NA	9/173 (5.2)
Treatment profiles
Intravenous thrombolysis, n (%)	96/539 (17.8)	24/121 (19.8)	72/418 (17.2)	0.51	0.067	47/205 (22.9)	16/32 (50)	31/173 (17.9)	0.00	0.72
Onset to imaging time, min, median (IQR)	212 (85-380)	168 (76-399.5)	220 (85v368.8)	0.57	0.004	190 (86.5–290)	157.5(69.3–254.3)	191 (88–296)	0.39	0.204
General anesthesia, n (%)	NA	NA	170/413 (41.2)	NA		60/170 (35.3)	NA	60/170 (35.3)	NA
Onset to puncture time, min, median (IQR)	NA	NA	339.5 (223.8–523.8)	NA		307.5 (205.8–426.3)	NA	307.5 (205.8–426.3)	NA
Onset to revascularization, min, median (IQR)	NA	NA	470.5 (344.3–650)	NA		NA	NA	390 (297.8–567.8)	NA
Number of passes using thrombectomy, median (IQR)	NA	NA	1 (1–2)	NA		1 (1–2)	NA	1 (1–2)	NA
mTICI 2b-3, n (%)	NA	NA	339/418 (81.1)	NA		NA	NA	141/173 (81.5)	NA

ASITN/SIR: the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology; CE: cardioembolism; EVT: endovascular treatment; IQR: interquartile range; LAA: large artery atherosclerosis; mTICI: modified Treatment in Cerebral Infarction; NIHSS: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; SMD: standardized mean difference; pc-ASPECT: posterior circulation–Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score; SMT: standard medical therapy.

Second, we investigated the associations between stroke etiology and outcomes in patients treated with EVT through multivariable logistic regression, with the previously recognized variables adjusted, including age, medical history of diabetes and ischemic stroke, baseline NIHSS, pc-ASPECT, IV thrombolysis, neutrophil/ lymphocyte ratio, and onset to recanalization time.^10,12 The efficacy and safety outcomes of rescue therapy were also assessed among EVT-patients with LAA subtype using χ² test. If a statistically significant difference between three groups was observed, then a pairwise comparison between two groups was performed with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.

All p-values were two-tailed, and significance was set at p < 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 23.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA) and R version 4.0.5 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing).

Results

Patients’ characteristics

Among 829 patients in the BASILAR study, 85 patients were excluded because of different stroke subtypes. The remaining 744 patients were included in this subgroup analysis (Figure 1). Among them, 539 patients had the LAA subtype (121 patients in SMT and 418 in EVT), and 205 were CE in origin (32 in SMT and 173 in EVT).

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of the patient selection process.

The baseline characteristics of the BAO patients are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The median age (IQR) of these patients was 63 (57–71) years and 71 (62–78) in the LAA and CE subgroups, respectively. In the LAA subgroup, the median (IQR) baseline NIHSS was 25 (16–32), pc-ASPECT was 8 (6–9), and onset to imaging time was 212 (85–380) min. In the CE group, the median (IQR) baseline NIHSS was 30 (18–34), pc-ASPECT was 8 (7–10), and onset to imaging time was 190 (86.5–290) min. In the LAA subgroup, EVT patients were younger, more often male, had less hypertension and higher baseline pc-ASPECTS, compared with SMT patients. In the CE subgroup, EVT patients had lower diastolic blood pressure, lower rate of intravenous thrombolysis, and higher baseline pc-ASPECTS, compared with SMT patients. Additionally, the occlusion site between the SMT and EVT groups was different in both the LAA and CE subgroups. When using a propensity score approach with inverse probability of treatment weighted estimation, some of the baseline characteristics were still imbalanced between EVT and SMT in both LAA and CE subtypes (Table 2).

Table 2.

Baseline characteristics according to the LAA and CE of stroke subtype using a propensity score approach with inverse probability of treatment weighted estimation.

	LAA		p-Value	SMD	CE		p-Value	SMD
	EVT (n = 414.1)	Control (n = 134.9)	p-Value	SMD	EVT (n = 173.9)	Control (n = 44.5)	p-Value	SMD
Age, y, median (IQR)	63.0 (57.0–71.0)	66.3 (60.0–75.0)	0.001	0.346	71.0 (63.0–78.0)	71.0 (60.6–79.5)	0.79	0.063
Sex, male, n (%)	331.4 (70.2)	88.2 (68.4)	0.01	0.271	101.20 (58.2)	29.9 (67.1)	0.37	0.185
Blood pressure on admission, mmHg, median (IQR)
Systolic	153.4 (138.0–172.0)	160.0 (145.0–175.1)	0.02	0.181	147.0 (128.0–165.9)	153.9 (132.0–174.9)	0.11	0.517
Diastolic	86.0 (79.0–99.0)	89.1 (80.0–98.0)	0.52	0.017	84.0 (77.0–96.2)	90.0 (83.0–100.0)	0.03	0.303
Baseline NIHSS score, median (IQR)	25.00 (16.0–32.0)	24.0 (14.1–32.0)	0.45	0.093	28.0 (18.0–34.0)	30.0 (16.0–31.1)	0.73	0.05
Medical history, n (%)
Hypertension	320.7 (77.6)	110.2 (85.5)	0.05	0.206	110.6 (63.6)	25.2 (56.7)	0.51	0.141
Hyperlipidemia	164.7 (39.9)	53.4 (41.4)	0.76	0.032	39.5 (22.7)	17.0 (38.2)	0.12	0.342
Diabetes	108.0 (26.1)	30.4 (23.6)	0.57	0.059	31.1 (17.9)	4.7 (10.6)	0.30	0.208
Smoking	170.5 (41.3)	32.0 (24.8)	0.001	0.355	33.1 (19.0)	4.1 (9.3)	0.20	0.281
Atrial fibrillation	2.3 (0.6)	0.0 (0.0)	0.34	0.106	129.0 (74.2)	31.6 (71.0)	0.72	0.071
Ischemic stroke	107.4 (26.0)	38.5 (29.9)	0.40	0.088	26.1 (15.0)	7.4 (16.7)	0.82	0.047
Baseline pc-ASPECT, median (IQR)	8.0 (7.0–9.0)	7.0 (6.0–8.0)	<0.001	0.397	8.0 (7.0–10.0)	7.0 (6.0–8.0)	0.002	0.536
ASITN/SIR grade, n (%)			0.73				0.17
0–1	240.4 (58.2)	73.8 (57.3)		0.018	117.0 (67.3)	34.5 (77.6)		0.232
2	113.7 (27.5)	32.9 (25.5)		0.046	35.5 (20.4)	2.9 (6.5)		0.416
3–4	59.2 (14.3)	22.1 (17.2)		0.080	21.4 (12.3)	7.1 (15.9)		0.104
Stroke severity, n (%)			0.38	0.092			0.87	0.033
Mild to moderate	98.3 (23.8)	35.8 (27.8)			32.2 (18.5)	8.8 (19.8)
Severe	314.9 (76.2)	93.0 (72.2)			141.7 (81.5)	35.7 (80.2)
Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio	7.9 (4.9–12.5)	7.5 (4.4–11.8)	0.36	0.028	7.3 (4.4–12.0)	7.1 (4.9–13.1)	0.71	0.073
Occlusion site, n (%)			<0.001				0.04
Distal basilar artery	63.8 (15.4)	14.7 (11.4)		0.118	131.4 (75.5)	28.6 (64.3)		0.246
Middle basilar artery	152.8 (37.0)	85.8 (66.6)		0.620	22.9 (13.2)	14.7 (33.1)		0.485
Proximal basilar artery	93.9 (22.7)	10.6 (8.2)		0.410	8.6 (5.0)	1.2 (2.6)		0.126
Vertebral artery-V4 segment	102.6 (24.8)	17.7 (13.7)		0.284	11.0 (6.3)	0.0 (0.0)		0.367
Treatment profiles
Intravenous thrombolysis, n (%)	73.0 (17.7)	25.1 (19.5)	0.65	0.048	43.0 (24.7)	26.3 (59.0)	0.001	0.742
Onset to imaging time, min, median (IQR)	220.0 (86.8–360.4)	165.5 (71.8–379.4)	0.42		182.0 (88.0–290.0)	160.9 (66.4–239.1)	0.52	0.183
General anesthesia, n (%)	168.3 (41.3)	NA	NA	0.019	57.4 (33.6)	NA	NA	NA
Onset to puncture time, min, median (IQR)	337.2 (226.5–510.0)	NA	NA		306.4 (215.0- 431.9)	NA	NA	NA
Onset to revascularization, min, median (IQR)	469.9 (345.2–649.4)	NA	NA		393.2 (300.6–568.0)	NA	NA	NA
Number of passes using thrombectomy, median (IQR)	1.0 (1.0–2.0)	NA	NA		1.0 (1.0–2.0)	NA	NA	NA
mTICI 2b-3, n (%)	335.2 (81.1)	NA	NA		140.6 (80.9)	NA	NA	NA

ASITN/SIR: the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology; CE: cardioembolism; EVT: endovascular treatment; IQR: interquartile range; LAA: large artery atherosclerosis; mTICI: modified Treatment in Cerebral Infarction; NIHSS: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; pc-ASPECT: posterior circulation–Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score; SMD: standardized mean difference; SMT: standard medical therapy.

Outcomes of EVT versus SMT in the LAA and CE subgroups

The distribution of mRS according to the treatment modality in the LAA and CE subgroups is shown in Supplemental Figure 2. After weighting with inverse probability of treatment estimation, the patients who, based on their characteristics, were treated with EVT rather than SMT, demonstrated higher rates of favorable functional outcomes in both the LAA (29.2% vs 11.7%, adjusted OR with 95% CI: 4.34 [2.15–8.78], p < 0.001) and the CE subtype (36.0% vs 8.1%, adjusted OR with 95% CI: 9.14 [1.96–42.55], p = 0.005) (Table 3). The interaction between stroke etiology and treatment effect was not significant (interaction for p value = 0.21). A similar result was found for functional independence in both the LAA and CE subgroups. Compared with SMT, EVT also demonstrated a lower incidence rate of mortality in both the LAA subgroup and the CE subgroup. In LAA subtype, the increased risks of ICH and sICH for EVT than SMT were observed (9.9% vs 0.8%, p = 0.02; and 7.3% vs 0.8%, p = 0.04, respectively). There was no ICH and sICH among SMT patients in the CE subgroup.

Table 3.

Efficacy and safety in patients with LAA and CE of stroke subtype with treatment modality weighted by inverse probability of treatment estimation.

Outcomes	LAA				CE				p for interaction
Outcomes	EVT, n (%)	SMT, n (%)	OR^*	p-Value	EVT, n (%)	SMT, n (%)	OR^*	p-Value	p for interaction
mRS 0–3	123.7 (29.9)	15.0 (11.7)	4.34 (2.15–8.78)	<0.001	62.6 (36.0)	3.6 (8.1)	9.14 (1.96–42.55)	0.005	0.21
mRS 0–2	102.7 (24.9)	11.7 (9.1)	4.47 (2.02–9.87)	<0.001	54.6 (31.4)	1.0 (2.2)	8.71 (1.70–44.79)	0.01	0.19
All-cause mortality	192.8 (46.6)	87.5 (67.9)	0.39 (0.25–0.61)	<0.001	85.2 (49.0)	30.3 (68.1)	0.27 (0.11–0.67)	0.005	0.91
ICH	40.0 (9.9)	1.0 (0.8)	9.67 (1.52–61.42)	0.02	20.0 (11.6)	0.0 (0.0)	NA	NA	0.998
sICH	29.7 (7.3)	1.0 (0.8)	6.95 (1.08–44.61)	0.04	13.3 (7.7)	0.0 (0.0)	NA	NA	0.998

CE: cardioembolism; EVT: endovascular treatment; ICH: intracranial hemorrhage; IPTW: inverse probability of treatment weighted estimation; LAA: large artery atherosclerosis; sICH: symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage; SMT: standard medical therapy; OR: odds ratio.

Inverse probability of treatment weighting.

Outcomes of LAA versus CE after EVT

The baseline characteristics of LAA versus CE in patients treated with EVT were shown in Supplemental Table S2. BAO patients with CE subtype were older and more often female, and had lower systolic blood pressure, higher baseline NIHSS, and pc-ASPECTS. Additionally, the time from onset to puncture, from puncture to recanalization, and from onset to recanalization was shorter in patients with the CE subtype than in patients with LAA. The most common occlusion site was the middle section of the basilar artery in patients with LAA, but the distal basilar artery was the most common site in patients with CE. The assignment of rescue therapy (including balloon dilatation and stenting) to patients in the LAA subgroup was significantly higher than that in the CE subgroup (63.5% vs 12.8%). However, the rate of successful reperfusion did not differ between the two subgroups.

Table 4 shows that there were numerically higher rates of favorable outcomes (64/173 (37.0%) vs 122/418 (29.2%), p = 0.06) and functional independence (57/173 (32.9%) vs 101/418 (24.2%), p = 0.03) after EVT in patients with CE than in those with LAA. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, the CE subgroup had better odds of functional independence than LAA (adjusted OR with 95% CI: 1.96 [1.04–3.72], p = 0.04). For safety outcomes, the risks of all-cause mortality, ICH, and sICH after EVT were similar between LAA and CE patients.

Table 4.

Efficacy and safety of CE versus LAA in BAO patients treated with EVT.

Outcomes	CE	LAA	Model 1^*		Model 2^†
Outcomes	N/Total (%)	N/Total (%)	Adjusted OR	p-Value	Adjusted OR	p-Value
mRS 0–3	64/173 (37)	122/418 (29.2)	1.33 (0.72–2.47)	0.36	1.32 (0.70–2.46)	0.39
mRS 0–2	57/173 (32.9)	101/418 (24.2)	1.98 (1.05–3.72)	0.03	1.96 (1.04–3.72)	0.04
All-cause mortality	83/173 (48)	196/418 (46.9)	0.92 (0.51–1.67)	0.78	0.95 (0.52–1.74)	0.95
ICH	18/171(10.5)	41/409 (10)	0.84 (0.36–1.96)	0.69	0.83 (0.36–1.95)	0.67
sICH	11/171 (6.4)	31/409 (7.6)	0.81 (0.29–2.26)	0.69	0.81 (0.29–2.27)	0.69

BAO: basilar artery occlusion; CE: cardioembolism; EVT: endovascular treatment; ICH: intracranial hemorrhage; LAA: large artery atherosclerosis; mRS: modified Rankin score; sICH: symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage; OR: odds ratio.

Adjusted for age, medical history of diabetes and ischemic stroke, baseline NIHSS, pc-ASPECT, occlusion site, ASITN/SIR grade, mTICI, intravenous thrombolysis, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio.

†

Adjusted for age, medical history of diabetes and ischemic stroke, baseline NIHSS, pc-ASPECT, occlusion site, ASITN/SIR grade, mTICI, intravenous thrombolysis, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and onset to recanalization time.

Angioplasty/stenting for failed mechanical thrombectomy in LAA

After mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in the LAA subtype, 265 (63.5%) patients received angioplasty and/or stenting. We further tested whether rescue angioplasty/stenting (RAS) improved clinical outcomes in patients with failed recanalization from MT.

We divided EVT-patients with the LAA subtype into recanalization success by MT alone group, rescue angioplasty/stenting group (RAS), and no rescue angioplasty/stenting group (non-RAS) after MT failed. Outcomes between these groups are shown in Table 5. We found that patients with successful recanalization by MT alone had the highest rates of favorable outcome (44/109, 40.0%) and lowest rate of mortality (38/109, 34.9%). In MT failed patients, compared with the non-RAS group, patients with RAS had higher rates of 90-day favorable functional outcome (71/265 (26.8%) vs 7/44 (15.9%)) and functional independence (61/265 (23.0%) vs 6/44 (13.6%)), although the differences were not significant. In addition, the RAS group had significantly lower mortality than the non-RAS group with no difference in the rate of sICH.

Table 5.

Comparisons of outcomes among patients with recanalization success by mechanical thrombectomy alone, patients with rescue angioplasty/stenting and patients without angioplasty/stenting after failed mechanical thrombectomy in the LAA subtype.

	Recanalization success by MT alone, N/total (%)	RAS group, N/total (%)	Non-RAS group, N/total (%)	p-Value
mRS 0–3^*	44/109 (40.0)	71/265 (26.8)	7/44 (15.9)	0.004
mRS 0–2	34/109 (31.2)	61/265 (23.0)	6/44 (13.6)	0.06
Mortality^†	38/109 (34.9)	123/265 (46.4)	35/44 (79.5)	<0.001
sICH	13/109 (11.9)	22/258 (8.5)	6/42 (14.3)	0.40

LAA: large artery atherosclerosis; MT: mechanical thrombectomy; mRS: modified Rankin scale; RAS: rescue angioplasty/stenting; sICH: symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.

Pairwise comparisons: p < 0.017 (0.05/3) after Bonferroni correction between MT alone versus RAS, and between MT alone versus non-RAS.

†

Pairwise comparisons: p < 0.017 (0.05/3) after Bonferroni correction between MT alone versus Non-RAS, and between RAS versus non-RAS.

Discussion

In this study, we found that both LAA and CE patients in BAO strokes, who, based on their characteristics, were treated with EVT rather than SMT, demonstrated better outcomes. In the EVT group, despite of equal rate of recanalization, patients with BAO caused by LAA had a lower rate of favorable functional outcome at 90 days compared with patients with cardioembolic origin in unadjusted data, but with no differences in mortality rate or sICH. The two groups displayed with important differences in both baseline and treatment characteristics, both affecting prognosis. After careful statistical adjustment, the OR of achieving functional independence, but not favorable functional outcome, remained significantly higher for CE-BAO (OR 1.96).

Our findings could be related to several factors. Patients with CE were older and had more severe neurological deficits, while patients with LAA had more risk factors for atherosclerosis, such as a higher proportion of hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and smoking. The imaging characteristics between the two subtypes were also different: more often distal basilar artery occlusion in CE, but more occlusion of the proximal and middle basilar artery in LAA. Occlusion of the proximal and middle basilar artery is related to ischemia of the pons, leading to a catastrophic status, such as locked-in syndrome.²⁴ Patients with the LAA subtype were associated with more rescue therapy and longer procedure time indicative of a more complicated treatment process. Prior studies have shown that a longer procedure time was an independent predictor of poor functional dependence.^14,25 Overall, these specific characteristics may result in different efficacy outcomes between CE and LAA subtypes after EVT.

The results from previous studies investigating the effect of the underlying mechanisms of BAO on prognosis after EVT were inconsistent, and different definitions of stroke mechanism was an important reason. Some studies showed that embolic strokes without vertebrobasilar artery stenosis had a better rate of recanalization and prognosis,^10,26 but in situ atherosclerotic thrombosis or embolism from tandem VA steno-occlusion would do poorly.¹³ Without discerning the source of embolism, Lee et al.¹² showed that BAO patients with embolism predicted a higher rate of 90-day functional independence than those with in situ atherosclerotic thrombosis. In our study, we used TOAST classification to define the potential etiology, and embolism from tandem VA steno-occlusion was categorized as LAA subtype. Our results were consistent with another study using TOAST classification for etiological determination.¹⁸ There are limitations in making direct comparisons between these studies, which suggests the importance of establishing a standardized classification of stroke mechanisms for patients with BAO.

Different from previous studies demonstrating lower rates of successful recanalization in BAO patients with a LAA subtype,^10,12,27 our results showed that the rate of successful recanalization after EVT was similar between LAA and CE subtypes. The difference was likely related to the more aggressive rescue treatment for patients with the LAA subtype in our study, with about 63.5% of patients received stent implantation or balloon dilatation.

In our study, we also found that rescue treatment may be effective for MT-failed patients, with an increased rate of favorable outcome by 10% and reduced rate of mortality by 30%. These results suggested that aggressive recanalization may be reasonable for BAO patients if reperfusion was not sustained after MT. Our results are consistent with previous studies showing that the combination of MT with angioplasty/stenting increased the rate of successful recanalization and better clinical outcome.^9,27,28 Therefore, successful reperfusion might be the most important factor for prognosis regardless of recanalization tools used, as demonstrated in treating strokes in the anterior circulation.²⁹

Although our study was based on the largest prospective, multicentre, cohort study to date with the most important confounders adjusted in the analysis, there are still some limitations that should be considered. First, the nonrandomized nature of the BASILAR registry would have all the observational drawbacks. Second, although LAA and CE were the most common etiologies in BAO patients, other causative and unknown etiologies might also be related to the outcomes. However, the number of such patients in the BASILAR trial was too small to be analyzed. Third, other factors, such as the time from onset to puncture and to recanalization time, the procedure time, and the thrombectomy device, were not further analyzed in different stroke subtypes due to the limited sample sizes. Further studies are needed to verify these factors.

Conclusions

In conclusion, in acute BAO strokes, both LAA and CE patients who, based on their characteristics, were treated with EVT rather than SMT, demonstrated better outcomes. Among EVT patients, those with LAA might be less likely to achieve functional independence at 3 months, but mortality and sICH did not differ between LAA or CE groups. Future studies are still needed to further define the subgroups of patients with acute BAO who may benefit from individualized recanalization or reperfusion strategies.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-eso-10.1177_23969873221101285 – Supplemental material for Endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion due to different stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis and cardioembolism

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-eso-10.1177_23969873221101285 for Endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion due to different stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis and cardioembolism by Huihui Liu, Guoyong Zeng, Hongliang Zeng, Yang Yu, Feixue Yue, Yingbing Ke, Zhizhong Yan, Jie Pu, Jun Zhang, Wan Wei, Dengke He, Yupeng Wu, Xianjun Huang and Peiyang Zhou in European Stroke Journal

Supplemental Material

sj-pptx-1-eso-10.1177_23969873221101285 – Supplemental material for Endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion due to different stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis and cardioembolism

Supplemental material, sj-pptx-1-eso-10.1177_23969873221101285 for Endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion due to different stroke etiologies of large artery atherosclerosis and cardioembolism by Huihui Liu, Guoyong Zeng, Hongliang Zeng, Yang Yu, Feixue Yue, Yingbing Ke, Zhizhong Yan, Jie Pu, Jun Zhang, Wan Wei, Dengke He, Yupeng Wu, Xianjun Huang and Peiyang Zhou in European Stroke Journal

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank all the coinvestigators of BASILAR (The EVT for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion Study) for their dedication to the study.

Correction (July 2023):

Article updated online to correct the affiliations for Xianjun Huang and Peiyang Zhou.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (81901236, 82071310).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects or their legal representatives before the study.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the ethics committee of Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, China, and each subcenter.

Guarantor

PZ.

Contributorship

HL and PZ conceived and designed the study, conducted data interpretation. GZ and XH carried out data acquisition and conducted the data analysis. HL wrote the first draft of the manuscript. HZ, YY, FX, YK, ZY, JP, JZ, WW, DH, and YW were involved in the subject recruitment and monitored the gathering of clinical data. GZ, XH, and PZ acquired data and critically revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

ORCID iD

Huihui Liu

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Schonewille

Wijman

Michel

, et al Treatment and outcomes of acute basilar artery occlusion in the Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS): a prospective registry study. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 724–730.

Powers

Rabinstein

Ackerson

, et al Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: 2019 update to the 2018 guidelines for the early management of acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2019; 50: e344–e418.

Turc

Bhogal

Fischer

, et al European Stroke Organisation (ESO) – European Society for Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) guidelines on mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke. J Neurointerv Surg 2019; 11: 535–538.

Liu

Dai

, et al Endovascular treatment versus standard medical treatment for vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (BEST): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19: 115–122.

Langezaal

LCM

van der Hoeven

Mont’Alverne

FJA

, et al Endovascular therapy for stroke due to basilar-artery occlusion. New Engl J Med 2021; 384: 1910–1920.

Writing Group for the BASILAR Group; Zi

Qiu

, et al Assessment of endovascular treatment for acute basilar artery occlusion via a nationwide prospective registry. JAMA Neurol 2020; 77: 561–573.

Markus

van der Worp

Rothwell

PM.

Posterior circulation ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack: diagnosis, investigation, and secondary prevention. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12: 989–998.

Labropoulos

Nandivada

Bekelis

Stroke of the posterior cerebral circulation. Int Angiol 2011; 30: 105–114.

Rajah

Cosky

, et al Outcomes in endovascular therapy for basilar artery occlusion: intracranial atherosclerotic disease vs. embolism. Aging Dis 2021; 12: 404–414.

10.

Baik

Park

Kim

, et al Mechanical thrombectomy in subtypes of basilar artery occlusion: relationship to recanalization rate and clinical outcome. Radiology 2019; 291: 730–737.

11.

Chung

Yong

Chang

, et al Stroke etiology is associated with outcome in posterior circulation stroke. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2015; 2: 510–517.

12.

Lee

Jung

Ryu

, et al Impact of stroke mechanism in acute basilar occlusion with reperfusion therapy. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2018; 5: 357–368.

13.

Sun

Raynald

RAYNALD

Tong

, et al Analysis of treatment outcome after endovascular treatment in different pathological subtypes of basilar artery occlusion: a single center experience. Transl Stroke Res 2021; 12: 230–238.

14.

Kim

Hong

Park

, et al Effect of intracranial atherosclerotic disease on endovascular treatment for patients with acute vertebrobasilar occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016; 37: 2072–2078.

15.

Powers

Derdeyn

Biller

, et al 2015 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association focused update of the 2013 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke regarding endovascular treatment: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2015; 46: 3020–3035.

16.

Adams

Jr. Bendixen

Kappelle

, et al Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke 1993; 24: 35–41.

17.

Puetz

Sylaja

Coutts

, et al Extent of hypoattenuation on CT angiography source images predicts functional outcome in patients with basilar artery occlusion. Stroke 2008; 39: 2485–2490.

18.

Singer

Berkefeld

Nolte

, et al Mechanical recanalization in basilar artery occlusion: the ENDOSTROKE study. Ann Neurol 2015; 77: 415–424.

19.

Higashida

Furlan

Roberts

, et al Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2003; 34: e109–e137.

20.

Zaidat

Yoo

Khatri

, et al Recommendations on angiographic revascularization grading standards for acute ischemic stroke: a consensus statement. Stroke 2013; 44: 2650–2663.

21.

von Kummer

Broderick

Campbell

, et al The Heidelberg bleeding classification: classification of bleeding events after ischemic stroke and reperfusion therapy. Stroke 2015; 46: 2981–2986.

22.

Kong

Yuan

Huang

, et al Outcomes of endovascular therapy in acute basilar artery occlusion with severe symptoms. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4: e2139550.

23.

Samaniego

Shaban

Ortega-Gutierrez

, et al Stroke mechanisms and outcomes of isolated symptomatic basilar artery stenosis. Stroke Vasc Neurol 2019; 4: 189–197.

24.

Nordgren

Markesbery

Fukuda

, et al Seven cases of cerebromedullospinal disconnection: the “locked-in” syndrome. Neurology 1971; 21: 1140–1148.

25.

Hassan

Shariff

Saver

, et al Impact of procedural time on clinical and angiographic outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke receiving endovascular treatment. J Neurointerv Surg 2019; 11: 984–988.

26.

Lee

Hong

Choi

, et al Predicting endovascular treatment outcomes in acute vertebrobasilar artery occlusion: a model to aid patient selection from the ASIAN KR registry. Radiology 2020; 294: 628–637.

27.

Sefcik

Tonetti

Desai

, et al Does stroke etiology influence outcome in the posterior circulation? An analysis of 107 consecutive acute basilar occlusion thrombectomies. Neurosurg Focus 2021; 51: E7.

28.

Gao

Sun

, et al Combined use of mechanical thrombectomy with angioplasty and stenting for acute basilar occlusions with underlying severe intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis: preliminary experience from a single Chinese center. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015; 36: 1947–1952.

29.

Chang

Kim

Bang

, et al Rescue stenting for failed mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: a multicenter experience. Stroke 2018; 49: 958–964.

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.

0.00 MB

0.44 MB

0.12 MB