Search

Background The choice of the first-line technique in vertebrobasilar occlusions (VBOs) remains challenging. We aimed to report outcomes in a large cohort of patients and to compare the efficacy and safety of contact aspiration (CA) and combined technique (CoT) as a first-line endovascular technique in patients with acute VBOs. Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical and neuroradiological data of patients with VBOs from the prospective, multicenter, observational Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) Registry in France between January 2015 and August 2023. The primary outcome was the first pass effect (FPE) rate, whereas modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2b-3 and 2c-3, number of passes, need for rescue strategy, modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2, mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) were secondary outcomes. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to investigate differences between the two groups. Results Among the 583 included patients (mean age 66.2 years, median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 13, median posterior circulation Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (pc--ASPECTS) 8), 393 were treated with CA alone and 190 with CoT. Procedures performed with CA were shorter compared with CoT (28 vs 47 min, P<0.0001); however, no differences were observed in terms of FPE (CA 43.3% vs CoT 38.4%, P=0.99), and successful final recanalization (mTICI 2b-3, CA 92.4% vs CoT 91.8%, P=0.74) did not differ between the two groups. Functional independence and sICH rates were also similar, whereas mortality was significantly lower in the CA group (34.5% vs 42.9%; OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.11). Conclusions We observed no differences in FPE, mTICI 2b-3, sICH, and functional independence between the two study groups. First-line CA was associated with shorter procedures and lower mortality rates than CoT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The choice of the first-line technique in vertebrobasilar occlusions (VBOs) remains challenging. We aimed to report outcomes in a large cohort of patients and to compare the efficacy and safety of contact aspiration (CA) and combined technique (CoT) as a first-line endovascular technique in patients with acute VBOs., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical and neuroradiological data of patients with VBOs from the prospective, multicenter, observational Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) Registry in France between January 2015 and August 2023. The primary outcome was the first pass effect (FPE) rate, whereas modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2b-3 and 2c-3, number of passes, need for rescue strategy, modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2, mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) were secondary outcomes. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to investigate differences between the two groups., Results: Among the 583 included patients (mean age 66.2 years, median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 13, median posterior circulation Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (pc-ASPECTS) 8), 393 were treated with CA alone and 190 with CoT. Procedures performed with CA were shorter compared with CoT (28 vs 47 min, P<0.0001); however, no differences were observed in terms of FPE (CA 43.3% vs CoT 38.4%, P=0.99), and successful final recanalization (mTICI 2b-3, CA 92.4% vs CoT 91.8%, P=0.74) did not differ between the two groups. Functional independence and sICH rates were also similar, whereas mortality was significantly lower in the CA group (34.5% vs 42.9%; OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.11)., Conclusions: We observed no differences in FPE, mTICI 2b-3, sICH, and functional independence between the two study groups. First-line CA was associated with shorter procedures and lower mortality rates than CoT., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JC is a consultant for Balt, Medtronic, Stryker. GM is a consultant for Balt USA, Bracco Imaging, Johnson&Johnson Medical Devices&Diagnostics Group, Medtronic, MicroVention, Phenox, Stryker., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)