The cost of providing mechanical thrombectomy in the UK NHS: a micro-costing study.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for the treatment of large vessel occlusion stroke is well established, but uncertainty remains around the true cost of delivering this treatment within the NHS. The aim of this study was to establish the cost of providing MT within the hyperacute phase of care and to explore differences in resources used and costs across different neuroscience centres in the UK. METHOD: This was a multicentre retrospective study using micro-costing methods to enable a precise assessment of the costs of MT from an NHS perspective. Data on resources used and their costs were collected from five UK neuroscience centres between 2015 and 2018. RESULTS: Data were collected on 310 patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with MT. The mean total cost of providing MT and inpatient care within 24 hours was £10,846 (95% confidence interval (CI) 10,527-11,165) per patient. The main driver of cost was MT procedure costs, accounting for 73% (£7,943; 95% CI 7,649-8,237) of the total 24-hour cost. Costs were higher for patients treated under general anaesthesia (£11,048; standard deviation (SD) 2,654) than for local anaesthesia (£9,978; SD 2,654), mean difference £1,070 (95% CI 381-1,759; p=0.003); admission to an intensive care unit (ICU; £12,212; SD 3,028) against for admission elsewhere (£10,179; SD 2,415), mean difference £2,032 (95% CI 1,345-2,719; p<0001).The mean cost within 72 hours was £12,440 (95% CI 10,628-14,252). The total costs for the duration of inpatient care before discharge from a thrombectomy centre was £14,362 (95% CI 13,603-15,122). CONCLUSIONS: Major factors contributing to costs of MT for stroke include consumables and staff for intervention, use of general anaesthesia and ICU admissions. These findings can inform the reimbursement, provision and strategic planning of stroke services and aid future economic evaluations.

Country-Wide Analysis of Systemic Factors Associated With Acute Ischemic Stroke Door to Needle Time.

Objective: Pre-hospital, in-hospital, and patient factors are associated with variation in door to needle (DTN) time in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Publications are usually from large single centers or multicenter registries with less reporting on national results. Materials and methods: All AIS patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (iv-tPA) over 4 years (2013-2016) in Northern Ireland were recorded prospectively, including patient demographics, pre-hospital care, thrombolysis rate, and DTN time. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with DTN time. Results: One thousand two hundred and one patients from 10,556 stroke admissions (11.4%) were treated with iv-tPA. Median NIHSS was 10 (IQR 6-17). Median DTN time was 54 min (IQR 36-77) with 61% treated < 60 min from arrival at hospital. National thrombolysis numbers increased over time with improving DTN time (P = 0.002). Arrival method at hospital (ambulance OR 2.3 CI1.4-3.8) pre-alert from ambulance (pre-alert OR = 5.3 CI3.5-8.1) and time of day (out of hours, n = 650, OR 0.20 CI 0.22-0.38) all P < 0.001, were the independent factors in determining DTN time. Variation in DTN time between centers occurred but was unrelated to volume of stroke admissions. Conclusion: Ambulance transport with pre-hospital notification and time of day are associated with shorter DTN time on a national level. Most thrombolysis was delivered outside of normal working hours but these patients are more likely to experience treatment delays. Re-organization of stroke services at a whole system level with emphasis on pre-hospital care and design of stroke teams are required to improve quality and equitable care in AIS nationally.

ESCAPE to Reality, Post-Trial Outcomes in an ESCAPE Centre: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

INTRODUCTION: The Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast provides the regional neuroendovascular service for Northern Ireland and was an enrolling centre for the ESCAPE endovascular stroke trial. Our aim was to assess outcomes for patients presenting with acute stroke following discontinuation of trial enrolment at our centre. METHODS: We collected data on all patients presenting with acute stoke between Nov-1st-2014 and Oct-31st-2015 who received endovascular treatment or received IV thrombolysis (IV-tPA) alone. ESCAPE eligibility of each patient was assessed. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Score (mRS) at 3 months. RESULTS: 129 patients presented with acute stoke symptoms during the time period; 56/129 (43.4%) patients in the intervention group and 73/129 (56.5%) patients in the control group. In the interventional group, 42/56 (75%) were considered ESCAPE eligible and 14/56 (25%) were considered ESCAPE ineligible. 30/42 (71.4%) ESCAPE eligible patients had a positive functional outcome at 3 months compared to 9/14 (64.2%) ESCAPE ineligible patients. In the control group, 37 (50.7%) had identifiable thrombotic occlusion and 13/37 (35.1%) were considered eligible for intervention. 4/13 (30.8%) achieved functional independence (mRS<3) at 3 months.There was a statistically significant difference in functional independence in those who underwent endovascular therapy compared to the control group (p= 0.04). CONCLUSION: ESCAPE eligible patients in our centre had favourable outcome rates superior to the published trial data. ESCAPE ineligible patients tended to do slightly less well, but still better than the favourable outcome rates achieved with IVtPA alone. There is potentially a wide discordance between the threshold for futility and trial eligibility criteria when considering endovascular treatment for acute ischaemic stroke.