Introduction Less than 55% of patients have shown good outcomes in multiple randomized clinical trials. We are validating the Interventional Stroke Assessment Scale-for-Eligibility in Endovascular Therapy (ISAS-ET)

Methods Retrospective analysis of all patients (n = 111) with ischemic stroke and received advanced stroke treatment. The score range (0–8), where a high score predicts a better outcome. Patients received 2, 1, 0 points for collateral scores of 3–4, 2, 0–1 respectively. Patients received 2, 1, 0 points for NIHSS scores of 0–10, 11–20 and over 21 respectively. Age < 65 received 1 point. Absence of AFib received 1 point. Time of onset < 3 h received 1 point. No prior stroke or disability received 1 point. A modified ranking scale (mRS) of 2 or less represented a good functional outcome. Mortality (mRS score = 6). Good disposition was defined as patient discharged to home or inpatient rehabilitation.

Results 10.1% mortality. We found a significant correlation between the ISAS-ET score and outcome (95% CI, 3.36–4.24, P < 0.001), mortality (95% CI, 3.93–4.82, P < 0.001) as well as good disposition (95% CI, 3.68–4.56, P < 0.001). 94% of the patients with an ISAS-ET score of 1, 2 or 3 had a poor outcome regardless of intervention. 86% of the patients with a score of 7 had a good outcome.

Conclusion The use ISAS-ET scale appears to be appropriate in this single center study at predicting outcome using parameters prior to intervention. This data may help determine the urgency of transfer for intervention in hospitals without endovascular capabilities while helping determine which patients will benefit significantly from intervention.

Disclosures H. Dababneh: None. K. Sivakumar: None. T. Sibharwal: None. R. Kumar: None. G. Jain: None. A. Tiwari: None. K. Arcot: None. J. Farkas: None.