Real-world safety and efficacy endovascular treatment versus standard medical treatment for basilar artery occlusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose: We acknowledge that between endovascular treatment (EVT) has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach, with some evidence of benefits observed in clinical trials. However, there remains a significant gap in the evidence regarding the real-world application and effectiveness of EVT.The objective of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy differences between EVT and standard medical treatment (SMT) in patients with basilar artery occlusion(BAO). Methods: Real-world studies (RWSs) on patients with BAO who underwent EVT and SMT were identified through searches in EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases. The efficacy outcomes included good clinical outcomes [defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores of 0-3 at 90 days], excellence clinical outcomes (defined as mRS scores of 0-2 at 90 days), 90-day mortality rate, and reperfusion status. The safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Subgroup analysis was conducted based on study type (prospective and retrospective studies). The relationship between EVT and SMT with the prognosis of BAO patients was expressed using odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: The seven studies involved a total of 2885 patients. After conducting sensitivity analysis and excluding articles with high heterogeneity, EVT demonstrated a significant association with good clinical outcomes at 90 days (OR=4.01, 95% CI: 2.60-6.19) and excellence clinical outcomes at 90 days (OR=5.70, 95% CI: 3.18-10.22) compared to SMT. Additionally, EVT showed a lower correlation with 90-day mortality rate compared to the SMT group (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.25-0.47). Subgroup analysis based on study type revealed that EVT had higher rates of successful reperfusion (retrospective study group: OR=7.97, 95% CI: 4.83-13.15; prospective study group: OR=51.57, 95% CI: 29.76-89.38) than the SMT group in both subgroups. The presence of sICH was not statistically significant in the retrospective study group (OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.58-2.48) and showed high heterogeneity. However, in the prospective study group, EVT exhibited a higher risk of bleeding compared to SMT (OR=11.42, 95% CI: 2.65-49.20). Conclusions: In summary, our real-world study aligns with the conclusions of recently published randomized controlled trials research. When comparing EVT and SMT in the treatment of BAO, EVT shows a higher correlation with favorable clinical outcomes, higher rates of successful reperfusion, and lower mortality rates. However, it does come with an increased risk of sICH.