Tina M Burton1, Marie Luby1, Zurab Nadareishvili1, Richard T Benson1, John K Lynch1, Lawrence L Latour1, Amie W Hsia2. 1. From Stroke Diagnostics and Therapeutics Section (T.M.B., M.L., Z.N., R.T.B., J.K.L., L.L.L., A.W.H.), National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; MedStar Washington Hospital Center Comprehensive Stroke Center (R.T.B., A.W.H.), Washington, DC; and Suburban Hospital Stroke Center (Z.N.), Bethesda, MD. 2. From Stroke Diagnostics and Therapeutics Section (T.M.B., M.L., Z.N., R.T.B., J.K.L., L.L.L., A.W.H.), National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; MedStar Washington Hospital Center Comprehensive Stroke Center (R.T.B., A.W.H.), Washington, DC; and Suburban Hospital Stroke Center (Z.N.), Bethesda, MD. hsiaa@ninds.nih.gov.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine to what degree stroke mimics skew clinical outcomes and the potential effects of incorrect stroke diagnosis. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of data from 2005 to 2014 included IV tissue plasminogen activator (tPA)-treated adults with clinical suspicion for acute ischemic stroke who were transferred or admitted directly to our 2 hub hospitals. Primary outcome measures compared CT-based spoke hospitals' and MRI-based hub hospitals' mimic rates, hemorrhagic transformation, follow-up modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and discharge disposition. Secondary outcomes were compared over time. RESULTS: Of the 725 thrombolysis-treated patients, 29% were at spoke hospitals and 71% at hubs. Spoke hospital patients differed from hubs by age (mean 62 ± 15 vs 72 ± 15 years, p < 0.0001), risk factors (atrial fibrillation, 17% vs 32%, p < 0.0001; alcohol consumption, 9% vs 4%, p = 0.007; smoking, 23% vs 13%, p = 0.001), and mimics (16% vs 0.6%, p < 0.0001). Inclusion of mimics resulted in better outcomes for spokes vs hubs by mRS ≤1 (40% vs 27%, p = 0.002), parenchymal hematoma type 2 (3% vs 7%, p = 0.037), and discharge home (47% vs 37%, p = 0.01). Excluding mimics, there were no significant differences. Comparing epochs, spoke stroke mimic rate doubled (9%-20%, p = 0.03); hub rate was unchanged (0%-1%, p = 0.175). CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolysis of stroke mimics is increasing at our CT-based spoke hospitals and not at our MRI-based hub hospitals. Caution should be used in interpreting clinical outcomes based on large stroke databases when stroke diagnosis at discharge is unclear. Inadvertent reporting of treated stroke mimics as strokes will artificially elevate overall favorable clinical outcomes with additional downstream costs to patients and the health care system. Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the US Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.
OBJECTIVE: To determine to what degree stroke mimics skew clinical outcomes and the potential effects of incorrect stroke diagnosis. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of data from 2005 to 2014 included IV tissue plasminogen activator (tPA)-treated adults with clinical suspicion for acute ischemic stroke who were transferred or admitted directly to our 2 hub hospitals. Primary outcome measures compared CT-based spoke hospitals' and MRI-based hub hospitals' mimic rates, hemorrhagic transformation, follow-up modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and discharge disposition. Secondary outcomes were compared over time. RESULTS: Of the 725 thrombolysis-treated patients, 29% were at spoke hospitals and 71% at hubs. Spoke hospital patients differed from hubs by age (mean 62 ± 15 vs 72 ± 15 years, p < 0.0001), risk factors (atrial fibrillation, 17% vs 32%, p < 0.0001; alcohol consumption, 9% vs 4%, p = 0.007; smoking, 23% vs 13%, p = 0.001), and mimics (16% vs 0.6%, p < 0.0001). Inclusion of mimics resulted in better outcomes for spokes vs hubs by mRS ≤1 (40% vs 27%, p = 0.002), parenchymal hematoma type 2 (3% vs 7%, p = 0.037), and discharge home (47% vs 37%, p = 0.01). Excluding mimics, there were no significant differences. Comparing epochs, spoke stroke mimic rate doubled (9%-20%, p = 0.03); hub rate was unchanged (0%-1%, p = 0.175). CONCLUSIONS:Thrombolysis of stroke mimics is increasing at our CT-based spoke hospitals and not at our MRI-based hub hospitals. Caution should be used in interpreting clinical outcomes based on large stroke databases when stroke diagnosis at discharge is unclear. Inadvertent reporting of treated stroke mimics as strokes will artificially elevate overall favorable clinical outcomes with additional downstream costs to patients and the health care system. Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the US Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Archana Purushotham; Soren Christensen; Patricia M Desmond; Yoshinari Nagakane; Mark W Parsons; Maarten G Lansberg; Michael Mlynash; Matus Straka; Deidre A De Silva; Jean-Marc Olivot; Roland Bammer; Gregory W Albers; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Shreyansh Shah; Marie Luby; Karen Poole; Teresa Morella; Elizabeth Keller; Richard T Benson; John K Lynch; Zurab Nadareishvili; Amie W Hsia Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ava L Liberman; Eric M Liotta; Fan Z Caprio; Ilana Ruff; Matthew B Maas; Richard A Bernstein; Rahul Khare; Deborah Bergman; Shyam Prabhakaran Journal: Neurol Clin Pract Date: 2015-06
Authors: Werner Hacke; Markku Kaste; Erich Bluhmki; Miroslav Brozman; Antoni Dávalos; Donata Guidetti; Vincent Larrue; Kennedy R Lees; Zakaria Medeghri; Thomas Machnig; Dietmar Schneider; Rüdiger von Kummer; Nils Wahlgren; Danilo Toni Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Louise Weir; Patricia M Desmond; Hans T H Tu; Peter J Hand; Bernard Yan; Geoffrey A Donnan; Mark W Parsons; Stephen M Davis Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: W Hacke; M Kaste; C Fieschi; R von Kummer; A Davalos; D Meier; V Larrue; E Bluhmki; S Davis; G Donnan; D Schneider; E Diez-Tejedor; P Trouillas Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-10-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ava L Liberman; Daniel Antoniello; Steven Tversky; Michael G Fara; Cen Zhang; Lindsey Gurin; Sara K Rostanski Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Shahram Majidi; Marie Luby; John K Lynch; Amie W Hsia; Richard T Benson; Chandni P Kalaria; Zurab Nadareishvili; Lawrence L Latour; Richard Leigh Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-09-13 Impact factor: 9.910