Bypass of Primary Stroke Centers Compared With Secondary Transfer for Endovascular Thrombectomy
BackgroundOur stroke network operates a hybrid organizational structure, with patients with potential large‐vessel occlusion taken to the local primary stroke center (PSC) during office hours, and directly bypassed to the endovascular thrombectomy–capable stroke center (EVT‐SC) after hours. We aimed...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Stroke: vascular and interventional neurology 2022-11, Vol.2 (6) |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | BackgroundOur stroke network operates a hybrid organizational structure, with patients with potential large‐vessel occlusion taken to the local primary stroke center (PSC) during office hours, and directly bypassed to the endovascular thrombectomy–capable stroke center (EVT‐SC) after hours. We aimed to compare the 2 methods of transfer.MethodsConsecutive patients with anterior large‐vessel occlusion treated with EVT between August 2017 and February 2021 were identified. Patients who had EVT puncture within 6 hours of last known normal were included for analysis. Patients were grouped into method of presentation: direct bypass to EVT‐SC (“EVT‐SC direct”) or taken to local PSC with secondary transfer to EVT‐SC (“PSC‐transfer”). The primary outcome was 3‐month functional independence (modified Rankin scale score 0–2). Secondary outcomes included mortality at 7 days and at 3 months.ResultsA total of 259 patients (109 women; mean±SD age, 66.8±15.2 years) were included; there were 91 (35.1%) EVT‐SC direct and 168 (64.9%) PSC‐transfer patients. The EVT‐SC direct patients had shorter median times from last known normal to thrombolysis (120 versus 147 minutes; P=0.004) and puncture (190 versus 230 minutes; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2694-5746 2694-5746 |
DOI: | 10.1161/SVIN.122.000390 |