Endovascular thrombectomy for basilar artery occlusion: translating research findings into clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

Basilar artery occlusion is a rare and severe condition. The effectiveness of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with basilar artery occlusion was unclear until recently, because these patients were excluded from most trials of endovascular thrombectomy for large-vessel occlusion ischaemic stroke.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

The Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS) and the Basilar Artery Occlusion Endovascular Intervention versus Standard Medical Treatment (BEST) trials, specifically designed to investigate the benefit of thrombectomy in patients with basilar artery occlusion, did not find significant evidence of a benefit of endovascular thrombectomy in terms of disability outcomes at 3 months after stroke. However, these trials suggested a potential benefit of endovascular thrombectomy in patients presenting with moderate-to-severe symptoms. Subsequently, the Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion (ATTENTION) and the Basilar Artery Occlusion Chinese Endovascular (BAOCHE) trials, which compared endovascular thrombectomy versus medical therapy within 24 h of onset, showed clear benefit of endovascular thrombectomy in reducing disability and mortality, particularly in patients with moderate-to-severe symptoms. The risk of intracranial haemorrhage with endovascular thrombectomy was similar to the risk in anterior circulation stroke. Thrombectomy was beneficial regardless of age, baseline characteristics, the presence of intracranial atherosclerotic disease, and time from symptom onset to randomisation. Therefore, the question of whether endovascular thrombectomy is beneficial in basilar artery occlusion now appears to be settled in patients with moderate-to-severe symptoms, and endovascular thrombectomy should be offered to eligible patients. WHERE NEXT?: Key outstanding issues are the potential benefits of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with mild symptoms, the use of intravenous thrombolysis in an extended time window (ie, after 4·5 h of symptom onset), and the optimal endovascular technique for thrombectomy. Dedicated training programmes and automated software to assist with the assessment of imaging prognostic markers could be useful in the selection of patients who might benefit from endovascular thrombectomy. Large international research networks should be built to address knowledge gaps in this field and allow the conduct of clinical trials with fast and consecutive enrolment and a diverse ethnic representation.