Sex differences in outcomes after endovascular treatment in posterior circulation stroke: results from the MR CLEAN Registry.

Background: Women with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) have been reported to have worse outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) than men. Whether these disparities also exist in LVO of the posterior circulation is yet uncertain. We assessed sex differences in clinical, technical, and safety outcomes of EVT in posterior circulation LVO.
Methods: We used data of patients with posterior circulation LVO included in the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry (2014-2018). Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days assessed with multivariable ordinal regression analysis. Secondary outcomes included favorable functional outcome (mRS ≤3), functional independence (mRS ≤2), death within 90 days, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 24-48 hours postintervention, complications, successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia 2B-3), and procedure duration analyzed with multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses.
Results: We included 264 patients (42% women). Compared with men, women were older (median age 68 vs 63 years), more often had prestroke disability (mRS ≥1: 37% vs 30%), and received intravenous thrombolytics less often (45% vs 56%). Clinical outcomes were similar between sexes (adjusted (common) OR (aOR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.34; favorable functional outcome 50% vs 43%, aOR 1.31, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.25; death 32% vs 29%, aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.84). In addition, NIHSS score after 24-48 hours (median 7 vs 9), successful reperfusion (77% vs 73%), and complications did not differ between men and women.
Conclusions: Outcomes in women treated with EVT for posterior circulation LVO were similar compared with men despite less favorable baseline characteristics in women. Therefore men and women may benefit equally from EVT.
Competing Interests: Competing interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: MJHW reports funding from NWO/ZonMw (VIDI 91717337 and Aspasia). JH reports funding from the Dutch Heart Foundation (CEI 2018T070). CBLMM reports funding from the TWIN Foundation, CVON/Dutch Heart Foundation, European Commission, Healthcare Evaluation Netherlands, and Stryker, all outside the submitted work (paid to institution). In addition, he is shareholder of Nicolab. IRvdW reports consulting fees from Philips, Medtronic, and Neurophyxia. DWJD reports funding from the Dutch Heart Foundation, Brain Foundation Netherlands, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Health Holland Top Sector Life Sciences & Health, and unrestricted grants from Penumbra Inc, Stryker European Operations BV, Medtronic, Thrombolytic Science, LLC and Cerenovus, all paid to the institution. The other authors had no conflicting interests.
(© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)