ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of drip and ship (DS) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) by comparing three treatment strategies: 1) patients seen at a primary stroke center, started on emergency intravenous thrombolysis and then transported to a comprehensive stroke center (drip and ship, DS); 2) patients immediately transferred to comprehensive stroke center without starting intravenous thrombolysis, for mechanical thrombectomy (non-drip and ship, non-DS); and 3) patients admitted directly to the comprehensive stroke center for assessment and subsequent bridging thrombolysis (mothership, MS). MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of patients that underwent mechanical thrombectomy for AIS from November 2020 to May 2022 at our institution. Patients were divided into three groups: DS, non-DS, and MS. Time course, multimodal CT features and clinical results were compared among the three groups. ResultsThe study included 62 patients, with 19, 18, and 25 patients in DS, non-DS, and MS groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics did not differ among the three groups. The DS group had a significantly longer median onset to groin time than the MS group (395 min vs 244 min; P < 0.001), a significantly shorter onset to primary stroke center time than the non-DS group (90 min vs 463 min; P < 0.001), and a longer primary stroke center to groin puncture time than the non-DS group (277 min vs 162 min; P = 0.002). The onset to needle time was longer in the MS group than the DS group (151.2 min vs 111.8 min; P = 0.041). The intravenous thrombolysis to puncture time was shorter in the MS group compared with DS (56 min vs 278 min; P < 0.001). No significant differences were present among groups in post-operative variables measured. ConclusionsDS is a safe and effective method, with no increased risk of postoperative complications or death compared to non-DS and MS methods. The study provides a reference for the selection of transport modes for AIS patients.