Background: and Purpose The safety and efficacy of tenecteplase in patients with ischemic stroke due to medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) are not well studied. We aimed to compare tenecteplase with alteplase in stroke due to MeVO. Methods: Patients with baseline M2-middle cerebral artery (MCA), M3/M4-MCA, P2/P3/P4-posterior cerebral artery (PCA), A2/A3/A4-anterior cerebral artery (ACA) occlusions from the Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase (AcT) trial were included. Primary outcome was the proportion of 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–1. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mRS 0–2, ordinal mRS, mortality, quality of life measures (EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level, EuroQol visual analog scale), and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Initial and final successful reperfusion were reported in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Results: Among 1,558 patients with available baseline computed tomography angiography; 455 (29.2%) had MeVO of which 27.5% (125/455) were proximal M2; 16.3% (74/455) were distal M2; 35.2% (160/455) were M3/M4; 7.5% (34/455) were A2/A3/A4; and 13.6% (62/455) were P2/P3/P4 occlusions. EVT was performed in 87/455 (19.1%) patients. mRS 0–1 at 90 days was achieved in 37.9% in the tenecteplase versus 34.7% in the alteplase group (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–1.25). Rates of 90-day mRS 0–2, sICH, and mortality were similar in both groups. No statistical difference was noted in initial successful reperfusion rates (13.0% vs. 7.5%) among the 87 patients who underwent endovascular thrombectomy. However, final successful reperfusion was higher in the tenecteplase group (71.7% vs. 60.0%, aRR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04–1.61). Conclusion Intravenous tenecteplase had comparable safety, functional outcomes and quality of life compared to intravenous alteplase among patients with MeVO. Among those treated with EVT, tenecteplase was associated with higher successful reperfusion rates than alteplase.

Background: and Purpose Various imaging paradigms are used for endovascular treatment (EVT) decision-making and outcome estimation in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aim to compare how these imaging paradigms perform for EVT patient selection and outcome estimation. Methods: Prospective multi-center cohort study of patients with AIS symptoms with multi-phase computed tomography angiography (mCTA) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) baseline imaging. mCTA-based EVT-eligibility was defined as presence of large vessel occlusion (LVO) and moderate-to-good collaterals on mCTA. CTP-based eligibility was defined as presence of LVO, ischemic core (defined on relative cerebral blood flow, absolute cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume maps) <70 mL, mismatch-ratio >1.8, absolute mismatch >15 mL. EVT-eligibility and adjusted rates of good outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0–2) based on these imaging paradigms were compared. Results: Of 289/464 patients with LVO, 263 (91%) were EVT-eligible by mCTA-criteria versus 63 (22%), 19 (7%) and 103 (36%) by rCBF, aCBF, and CBV-CTP-criteria. CTP and mCTA-criteria were discordant in 40% to 53%. Estimated outcomes were best in patients who met both mCTA and CTP eligibility-criteria and were treated with EVT (62% to 87% good outcome). Patients eligible for EVT by mCTA-criteria and not by CTP-criteria receiving EVT achieved good outcome rates of 53% to 57%. Few patients met CTP-criteria and not mCTA-criteria for EVT. Conclusions Simpler imaging selection criteria that rely on little else than detection of the occluded blood vessel may be more sensitive and less specific, thus resulting in more patients being offered EVT and arguably benefiting from it.

Background: and Purpose Various imaging paradigms are used for endovascular treatment (EVT) decision-making and outcome estimation in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aim to compare how these imaging paradigms perform for EVT patient selection and outcome estimation. Methods: Prospective multi-center cohort study of patients with AIS symptoms with multi-phase computed tomography angiography (mCTA) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) baseline imaging. mCTA-based EVT-eligibility was defined as presence of large vessel occlusion (LVO) and moderate-to-good collaterals on mCTA. CTP-based eligibility was defined as presence of LVO, ischemic core (defined on relative cerebral blood flow, absolute cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume maps) <70 mL, mismatch-ratio >1.8, absolute mismatch >15 mL. EVT-eligibility and adjusted rates of good outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0–2) based on these imaging paradigms were compared. Results: Of 289/464 patients with LVO, 263 (91%) were EVT-eligible by mCTA-criteria versus 63 (22%), 19 (7%) and 103 (36%) by rCBF, aCBF, and CBV-CTP-criteria. CTP and mCTA-criteria were discordant in 40% to 53%. Estimated outcomes were best in patients who met both mCTA and CTP eligibility-criteria and were treated with EVT (62% to 87% good outcome). Patients eligible for EVT by mCTA-criteria and not by CTP-criteria receiving EVT achieved good outcome rates of 53% to 57%. Few patients met CTP-criteria and not mCTA-criteria for EVT. Conclusions Simpler imaging selection criteria that rely on little else than detection of the occluded blood vessel may be more sensitive and less specific, thus resulting in more patients being offered EVT and arguably benefiting from it.