RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: With increasing use of endovascular therapy, physicians' attitudes toward intravenous alteplase in endovascular therapy-eligible patients may be changing. We explored current intravenous alteplase treatment practices of physicians in endovascular therapy- and alteplase-eligible patients with acute stroke using prespecified case scenarios and compared how their current local treatment practices differ compared with an assumed ideal environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In an international multidisciplinary survey, 607 physicians involved in acute stroke care were randomly assigned 10 of 22 case scenarios, among them 14 with guideline-based alteplase recommendations (9 with level 1A and 5 with level 2B recommendation) and were asked how they would treat the patient: A) under their current local resources, and B) under assumed ideal conditions. Answer options were the following: 1) anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy, 2) endovascular therapy, 3) endovascular therapy plus intravenous alteplase, and 4) intravenous alteplase. Decision rates were calculated, and multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine variables associated with the decision to abandon intravenous alteplase. RESULTS: In cases with guideline recommendations for alteplase, physicians favored alteplase in 82.0% under current local resources and in 79.3% under assumed ideal conditions (P < .001). Under assumed ideal conditions, interventional neuroradiologists would refrain from intravenous alteplase most often (6.28%, OR = 2.40; 95% CI, 1.01-5.71). When physicians' current and ideal decisions differed, most would like to add endovascular therapy to intravenous alteplase in an ideal setting (196/3861 responses, 5.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients eligible for endovascular therapy and intravenous alteplase, we observed a slightly lower decision rate in favor of intravenous alteplase under assumed ideal conditions compared with the decision rate under current local resources.