Comparison of clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular treatment using different perfusion modalities: a real-world multicenter study

BACKGROUND: Advanced perfusion modalities are increasingly popular for various diseases. However, few studies have focused on contrasting perfusion patterns. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the time efficiency and clinical outcomes of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who underwent endovascular treatment (EVT) before one-stop arterial spin labeling (ASL) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) protocols. METHODS: This study retrospectively included 326 patients with AIS who had accepted EVT within 24 h of onset from four comprehensive stroke centers between October 2017 and September 2022. After 1:1 matching of the propensity scores, 202 patients were separated into two groups: the ASL group (n = 101) and the CTP group (n = 101). RESULTS: Functional independence at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0–2; p = 0.574), onset-to-puncture time (p = 0.231), door-to-puncture time (p = 0.136), and door-to-perfusion time (p = 0.646) were not significantly different between the two groups. The proportion of EVT complications (31.7% in the ASL group vs. 14.9% in the CTP group, p = 0.005) and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) at 24 h (23.8% in the ASL group vs. 9.9% in the CTP group, p = 0.008) in the CTP group were lower than the ASL group. The ischemic core volume was a common predictor of favorable outcomes in both ASL (p < 0.001) and CTP (p < 0.001) groups. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in time efficiency and efficacy outcomes between the two groups of patients receiving one-stop ASL and CTP. The proportion of sICH at 24 h and EVT complications of patients in the CTP group was lower than the ASL group. The ischemic core volume was an independent predictor for favorable outcomes.