The charlotte large artery occlusion endovascular therapy outcome score compares favorably to the critical area perfusion score for prognostication before basilar thrombectomy.

Introduction: The Critical Area Perfusion Score (CAPS) predicts functional outcomes in vertebrobasilar thrombectomy patients based on computed tomography perfusion (CTP) hypoperfusion. We compared CAPS to the clinical-radiographic Charlotte Large artery occlusion Endovascular therapy Outcome Score (CLEOS).

Methods: Acute basilar thrombosis patients from January 2017-December 2021 were included in this retrospective analysis from a health system's stroke registry. Inter-rater reliability was assessed for 6 CAPS raters. A logistic regression with CAPS and CLEOS as predictors was performed to predict 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 4-6. Area under the curve (AUC) analyses were performed to evaluate prognostic ability.

Results: 55 patients, mean age 65.8 (± 13.1) years and median NIHSS score 15.5, were included. Light's kappa among 6 raters for favorable versus unfavorable CAPS was 0.633 (95% CI 0.497-0.785). Increased CLEOS was associated with elevated odds of a poor outcome (odds ratio (OR) 1.0010, 95% CI 1.0007-1.0014, p<0.01), though CAPS was not (OR 1.0028, 95% CI 0.9420-1.0676, p=0.93). An overall favorable trend was observed for CLEOS (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.84) versus CAPS (AUC 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.64; p=0.051). Among 85.5% of patients with endovascular reperfusion, CLEOS had a statistically higher sensitivity than CAPS at identifying poor 90-day outcomes (71% versus 21%, p=0.003).

Conclusions: CLEOS demonstrated better predictive ability than CAPS for poor outcomes overall and in patients achieving reperfusion after basilar thrombectomy.