Influence of vascular imaging acquisition at local stroke centers on workflows in the drip-n-ship model: a RACECAT post hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND: The influence of vascular imaging acquisition on workflows at local stroke centers (LSCs) not capable of performing thrombectomy in patients with a suspected large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke remains uncertain. We analyzed the impact of performing vascular imaging (VI+) or not (VI- at LSC arrival on variables related to workflows using data from the RACECAT Trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare workflows at the LSC among patients enrolled in the RACECAT Trial with or without VI acquisition. METHODS: We included patients with a diagnosis of ischemic stroke who were enrolled in the RACECAT Trial, a cluster-randomized trial that compared drip-n-ship versus mothership triage paradigms in patients with suspected acute LVO stroke allocated at the LSC. Outcome measures included time metrics related to workflows and the rate of interhospital transfers and thrombectomy among transferred patients. RESULTS: Among 467 patients allocated to a LSC, vascular imaging was acquired in 277 patients (59%), of whom 198 (71%) had a LVO. As compared with patients without vascular imaging, patients in the VI+ group were transferred less frequently as thrombectomy candidates to a thrombectomy-capable center (58% vs 74%, P=0.004), without significant differences in door-indoor-out time at the LSC (median minutes, VI+ 78 (IQR 69-96) vs VI- 76 (IQR 59-98), P=0.6). Among transferred patients, the VI+ group had higher rate of thrombectomy (69% vs 55%, P=0.016) and shorter door to puncture time (median minutes, VI+ 41 (IQR 26-53) vs VI- 54 (IQR 40-70), P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Among patients with a suspected LVO stroke initially evaluated at a LSC, vascular imaging acquisition might improve workflow times at thrombectomy-capable centers and reduce the rate of futile interhospital transfers. These results deserve further evaluation and should be replicated in other settings and geographies.

The Role of Vascular Imaging atReferral Centers in the Drip and Ship Paradigm.

BACKGROUND: In drip-and-ship protocols, non-invasive vascular imaging (NIVI) at Referral Centers (RC), although recommended, is not consistently performed and its value is uncertain. We evaluated the role of NIVI at RC, comparing patients with (VI+) and without (VI-) vascular imaging in several outcomes. METHODS: Observational, multicenter study from a prospective government-mandated population-based registry of code stroke patients. We selected acute ischemic stroke patients, initially assessed at RC from January-2016 to June-2020. We compared and analyzed the rates of patients transferred to a Comprehensive Stroke Center (CSC) for Endovascular Treatment (EVT), rates of EVT and workflow times between VI+ and VI- patients. RESULTS: From 5128 ischemic code stroke patients admitted at RC; 3067 (59.8%) were VI+, 1822 (35.5%) were secondarily transferred to a CSC and 600 (11.7%) received EVT. Among all patients with severe stroke (NIHSS ≥16) at RC, a multivariate analysis showed that lower age, thrombolytic treatment, and VI+ (OR:1.479, CI95%: 1.117-1.960, p=0.006) were independent factors associated to EVT. The rate of secondary transfer to a CSC was lower in VI+ group (24.6% vs. 51.6%, p<0.001). Among transferred patients, EVT was more frequent in VI+ than VI- (48.6% vs. 21.7%, p<0.001). Interval times as door-in door-out (median-minutes 83.5 vs. 82, p= 0.13) and RC-Door to puncture (median-minutes 189 vs. 178, p= 0.47) did not show differences between both groups. CONCLUSION: In the present study, NIVI at RC improves selection for EVT, and is associated with receiving EVT in severe stroke patients. Time-metrics related to drip-and-ship model were not affected by NIVI.

Vascular Occlusion Evolution in Endovascular Reperfusion Candidates Transferred from Primary to Comprehensive Stroke Centers.

BACKGROUND: The evolution of the symptomatic intracranial occlusion during transfers from primary stroke centers (PSCs) to comprehensive stroke centers (CSCs) for endovascular treatment (EVT) is not widely known. Our aim was to identify factors related to partial or complete recanalization (REC) at CSC arrival in patients with a documented large vessel occlusion (LVO) in PSC transferred for EVT evaluation to better define the workflow at CSC of this group of patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational, multicenter study from a prospective, government-mandated, population-based registry of stroke patients with documented LVO at PSC transferred to CSC for EVT from January 2017 to June 2019. The primary end point was defined as partial or complete REC that precluded EVT at CSC arrival (REC). We evaluated the association between baseline, treatment variables and time intervals with the presence of REC. RESULTS: From 589 patients, the rate of REC at CSC was 10.5% in all LVO patients transferred from PSC to CSC for EVT evaluation. On univariate analysis, lower PSC-NIHSS (median 12vs.16, p = 0.001), tPA treatment at PSC (13.7 vs. 5.0%; p = 0.001), presence of M2 occlusion on PSC (16.8 vs. 9%; p = 0.023), and clinical improvement at CSC arrival (21.7 vs. 9.6% p = 0.001) were associated with REC at CSC. On multivariate analysis, clinical improvement at CSC arrival (p < 0.001, OR: 5.96 95% CI: 2.5-13.9) and PSC tPA treatment predicted REC (p = 0.003, OR: 4.65, 95% CI: 1.73-12.4). CONCLUSION: REC at CSC arrival occurs exceptionally in patients with a documented LVO on PSC. Repeating a second vascular study before EVT would not be necessary in most patients. Despite its modest effect, tPA treatment at PSC was an independent predictor of REC.

Access to Endovascular Treatment in Remote Areas: Analysis of the Reperfusion Treatment Registry of Catalonia.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Since demonstration of the benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke patients with proximal arterial occlusion, stroke care systems need to be reorganized to deliver EVT in a timely and equitable way. We analyzed differences in the access to EVT by geographical areas in Catalonia, a territory with a highly decentralized stroke model. METHODS: We studied 965 patients treated with EVT from a prospective multicenter population-based registry of stroke patients treated with reperfusion therapies in Catalonia, Spain (SONIIA). Three different areas were defined: (A) health areas primarily covered by Comprehensive Stroke Centers, (B) areas primarily covered by local stroke centers located less than hour away from a Comprehensive Stroke Center, and (C) areas primarily covered by local stroke centers located more than hour away from a Comprehensive Stroke Center. We compared the number of EVT×100 000 inhabitants/year and time from stroke onset to groin puncture between groups. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Throughout the study period, there were significant differences in the population rates of EVT across geographical areas. EVT rates by 100 000 in 2015 were 10.5 in A area, 3.7 in B, and 2.7 in C. Time from symptom onset to groin puncture was 82 minutes longer in group B (312 minutes [245-435]) and 120 minutes longer in group C (350 minutes [284-408]) compared with group A (230 minutes [160-407]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Accessibility to EVT from remote areas is hampered by lower rate and longer time to treatment compared with areas covered directly by Comprehensive Stroke Centers.

Holter implantable subcutáneo: una nueva herramienta en el diagnóstico del ictus criptogénico / Implantable loop recorder: a new tool in the diagnosis of cryptogenic stroke

No disponible

Cardiac workup of ischemic stroke.

Stroke is the leading cause of disability in developed countries and the third cause of mortality. Up to 15-30% of ischemic strokes are caused by cardiac sources of emboli being associated with poor prognosis and high index of fatal recurrence. In order to establish an adequate preventive strategy it is crucial to identify the cause of the embolism. After a complete diagnostic workup up to 30% of strokes remain with an undetermined cause, and most of them are attributed to an embolic mechanism suggesting a cardiac origin.There is no consensus in the extent and optimal approach of cardiac workup of ischemic stroke. Clinical features along with brain imaging and the study of the cerebral vessels with ultrasonography or MRI/CT based angiography can identify other causes or lead to think about a possible cardioembolic origin.Atrial fibrillation is the most common cause of cardioembolic stroke. Identification of occult atrial fibrillation is essential. Baseline ECG, serial ECG('s), cardiac monitoring during the first 48 hours, and Holter monitoring have detection rates varying from 4 to 8% each separately. Extended cardiac monitoring with event loop recorders has shown higher rates of detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.Cardiac imaging with echocardiography is necessary to identify structural sources of emboli. There is insufficient data to determine which is the optimal approach. Transthoracic echocardiography has an acceptable diagnostic yield in patients with heart disease but transesophageal echocardiography has a higher diagnostic yield and is necessary if no cardiac sources have been identified in patients with cryptogenic stroke with embolic mechanism.