Division of Neurology, McMaster University/Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Second Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Eur J Neurol. 2021 Jun;28(6):2106-2110. doi: 10.1111/ene.14751. Epub 2021 Feb 12.
Independent randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have provided robust evidence for endovascular treatment (EVT) as the standard of care treatment for acute large vessel occlusions in the anterior circulation. We examined available studies specific to posterior cerebral circulation ischemic strokes to see if any conclusions can be drawn regarding EVT options.
We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of EVT versus standard medical treatment for patients with acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO). We extracted data for outcomes of interest and presented associations between the two groups with the use of risk ratios (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs), with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model to pool the effect estimates.
We identified five studies (two RCTs, three observational cohorts) including a total of 1098 patients. Patients receiving EVT had a higher risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) compared to those receiving non-interventional medical management (RR 5.42, 95% CI 2.74-10.71). Nonsignificant trends towards modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores 0-2 (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.74-1.41), mRS scores 0-3 (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.64-1.47), overall functional improvement (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.57-1.51), and all-cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78-1.35) at 3 months were seen.
Although EVT increases the probability of sICH, the available data do not exclude the possibility of improved functional outcomes over standard therapy. As larger studies are challenged by the perceived lack of equipoise in this vulnerable patient population, results of ongoing RCTs are expected to provide substantial input for future meta-analyses.
独立的随机对照临床试验(RCT)为急性前循环大血管闭塞的血管内治疗(EVT)提供了强有力的证据,这是标准的治疗方法。我们检查了专门针对后循环脑缺血性中风的现有研究,以确定是否可以得出关于 EVT 选择的任何结论。
我们进行了系统的文献检索,以确定评估 EVT 与急性基底动脉闭塞(BAO)患者标准药物治疗安全性和疗效的研究。我们提取了感兴趣的结局数据,并使用风险比(RR)或比值比(OR)来呈现两组之间的关联,同时使用相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。我们使用随机效应模型来汇总效果估计值。
我们确定了五项研究(两项 RCT,三项观察性队列研究),共纳入了 1098 名患者。与接受非介入性药物治疗的患者相比,接受 EVT 的患者发生症状性颅内出血(sICH)的风险更高(RR 5.42,95%CI 2.74-10.71)。改良Rankin 量表(mRS)评分 0-2(RR 1.02,95%CI 0.74-1.41)、mRS 评分 0-3(RR=0.97,95%CI 0.64-1.47)、总体功能改善(OR 0.93,95%CI 0.57-1.51)和 3 个月时全因死亡率(RR 1.03,95%CI 0.78-1.35)的趋势均无统计学意义。
尽管 EVT 增加了 sICH 的可能性,但现有数据并未排除标准治疗方法下功能结局改善的可能性。由于在这个脆弱的患者群体中,较大规模的研究受到缺乏均衡性的挑战,因此正在进行的 RCT 的结果预计将为未来的荟萃分析提供重要依据。