Background and Purpose It is unclear whether a particular stroke imaging modality offers an advantage for the acute stroke treatment. The aim of this study was to compare procedure times, efficacy and safety of thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy based on computed tomography (CT) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acute stroke imaging.Methods Data of stroke patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or mechanical thrombectomy (MT) were extracted from a nationwide, prospective stroke unit registry and categorized according to initial imaging modality. Study endpoints included procedure times, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), early neurological improvement, 3-month functional outcome by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and mortality.Results Stroke patients (n=16,799) treated with IVT and 2,248 treated with MT were included. MRI-guided patients (n=2,599) were younger, had less comorbidities and higher rates of strokes with unknown onset as compared to CT-guided patients. In patients treated with IVT, no differences were observed regarding the rates of functional outcome by mRS 0–1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.05), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.08), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.22). Patients undergoing MT selected by MRI as compared to CT showed equal rates of functional outcome by mRS 0–2 (adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.16), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.69), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.09). MRI-guided patients showed a significant intrahospital delay of about 20 minutes in both the IVT and the MT group.Conclusions This large non-randomized comparison study indicates that CT- and MRI-guided patient selection for IVT/MT may perform equally well in terms of functional outcome and safety.