Rolla T Sweis1, Yaniv Kerem2, Simon Waghchoure3, Erik B Kulstad4, Melvin D Wichter5. 1. Department of Pharmacy, Advocate Christ Medical Center, Advocate Children's Hospital, Chicago, USA. 2. Section of Emergency Medicine, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, USA. 3. Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Chicago, USA. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Advocate Christ Medical Center, Chicago, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Advocate Christ Medical Center, Chicago, USA E-mail: keremyaniv@gmail.com.
Dear Editor,Despite risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), thrombolytic therapy may improve patient outcomes in acute ischemic stroke.[14] We sought to determine if the hemorrhage after thrombolysis (HAT) score, a five-point scale used to predict risk of HAT, might be a useful decision-making tool in the community hospital setting [Table 1]. We reviewed all 39 patients who presented to our emergency department between March 2006 and October 2008 and received thrombolytics for acute stroke. Outcomes were determined by review of medical records and telephone contact with patients or family members. Outcome measures were ICH, mortality and mRS <2. The median age of patients was 72 (IQR 56-80), and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was 11 (IQR 6-17), of which 64% were female. Twelve patients (31%, 95%CI: 16-46%) developed ICH (mean NIHSS = 15). Six patients (15%, 95%CI: 4-27%) died (mean NIHSS = 19). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) measuring the ability of the HAT score to predict ICH was 0.66 (95%CI: 0.47-0.84). The AUC to predict mortality was 0.67 (95%CI: 0.43-0.91) and to predict favorable outcome after stroke (mRS <2) was 0.77 (95%CI: 0.62-0.91) [Figure 1]. Despite data being retrospectively gathered from a single hospital emergency department, valuable information was nonetheless observed. The HAT score performed marginally well in predicting a favorable outcome after acute ischemic stroke, perhaps providing an additional risk stratification tool when considering thrombolytic therapy.[235]
Table 1
Hemorrhage after thrombolysis score scale
Figure 1
Area under receiver operating characteristic curve for favorable outcome (mRS <2)
Hemorrhage after thrombolysis score scaleArea under receiver operating characteristic curve for favorable outcome (mRS <2)
Authors: Devin L Brown; William G Barsan; Lynda D Lisabeth; Michael E Gallery; Lewis B Morgenstern Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: D Strbian; A Meretoja; F J Ahlhelm; J Pitkäniemi; P Lyrer; M Kaste; S Engelter; T Tatlisumak Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: William J Meurer; Jennifer J Majersik; Shirley M Frederiksen; Allison M Kade; Annette M Sandretto; Phillip A Scott Journal: BMC Emerg Med Date: 2011-05-06