Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is performed selectively for acute vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (VBAO), but its benefit when presenting deficits are mild is unclear. This analysis used a hierarchical win-ratio framework to compare EVT plus best medical management (BMM) versus BMM alone in patients with admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores of 10 or less.
Investigators conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective registry of acute VBAO restricted to patients with admission NIHSS ≤10. Patients managed with EVT plus BMM were compared with those receiving BMM alone. The cohort was analyzed overall and in two admission NIHSS strata: 0–5 and 6–10.
The primary analytic strategy was a hierarchical win-ratio (WR). The hierarchy prioritized outcomes in this order: death status through the common follow-up period, 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Every possible pair comparing one EVT patient with one BMM patient was evaluated sequentially through the hierarchy and classified as an EVT win, a BMM win, or a tie. The total wins for each strategy across all pairs generated the win ratio.
An adjusted analysis used stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for baseline differences between treatment groups. Sensitivity analyses included truncation of IPTW weights at the 1st and 99th percentiles to examine robustness of results to extreme weights. The report provides WR estimates with 95% confidence intervals and P values.
The analysis included 1,232 patients in total: 428 underwent EVT and 804 received BMM alone. In the unweighted overall pairwise comparison, EVT achieved 146,674 wins, BMM achieved 149,958 wins, and there were 47,480 ties, resulting in a win ratio of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.84–1.15; P = 0.749). After stabilized IPTW adjustment, the WR was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.80–1.14; P = 0.618). Sensitivity analyses, including truncated weights, did not demonstrate a consistent overall association favoring EVT.
Exploratory analyses stratified by admission NIHSS produced different findings by severity subgroup. For patients with NIHSS scores of 0–5, the win ratio was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61–1.05; P = 0.101), which does not indicate a statistically significant advantage for EVT and numerically favored BMM. For patients with NIHSS scores of 6–10, the WR favored EVT at 1.36 (95% CI, 1.10–1.68; P = 0.004), suggesting a potential net benefit of EVT in this higher-but-still-mild symptom stratum. These stratified results were described as exploratory and hypothesis-generating.
In this hierarchical win-ratio analysis of a multicenter retrospective VBAO registry limited to patients with admission NIHSS ≤10, EVT was not associated with an overall net clinical advantage compared with BMM. The analysis applied a prioritized outcome framework (death, 90-day mRS, sICH) and used stabilized IPTW adjustment. An exploratory signal favoring EVT was observed in the subgroup with admission NIHSS 6–10, whereas no clear benefit was seen for NIHSS 0–5. The authors state that the positive signal for NIHSS 6–10 warrants confirmation in randomized trials, and that EVT use for patients with NIHSS 0–5 should remain cautious and individualized.
The study does not support routine use of EVT over BMM for all patients with mild VBAO (NIHSS ≤10) based on the hierarchical WR analysis.
A potential benefit of EVT was observed in patients with admission NIHSS 6–10; this finding is exploratory and should prompt randomized evaluation rather than immediate broad adoption.
For patients with NIHSS 0–5, EVT should be considered on a case-by-case basis, given lack of evidence for a net advantage in this analysis.
Note: Details beyond those reported in the source (for example, specific baseline covariates used for IPTW, exact follow-up duration defining the death endpoint, or center-level procedural volumes) were not reported in the source article and therefore are not described here.