Kevin J Keenan1, Charles Kircher2,3, Jason T McMullan3. 1. Department of Neurology , University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave, Box 0114, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. Kevin.Keenan@ucsf.edu. 2. University of Cincinnati Gardner Neuroscience Institute, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent advances in endovascular thrombectomy have made acute ischemic stroke due to a large vessel occlusion more treatable than ever. Rapid access to treatment remains paramount and multiple large vessel occlusion prediction scales have been created to enhance prehospital identification and triage of these patients. This review summarizes the current state of large vessel occlusion prediction scales, proposes a set of ideal scale features, and discusses the future of these scales and prehospital neurological emergency response systems. RECENT FINDINGS: A meta-analysis of the available data concluded that none of the currently published scales are more accurate than the others. However, other studies provide insight into important qualitative features beyond accuracy. At present, only a few large vessel occlusion prediction scales have been studied in the necessary prehospital suspected stroke patient population. Among these small studies, 26-51% of patients identified by scales had large vessel occlusions and 63-84% qualified for triage to a Comprehensive Stroke Center. Valuable scale features include binary scoring, inclusion of gaze deviation and arm weakness, exclusion of neglect, and prehospital validation in a suspected stroke cohort. Patients with neurological emergencies that mimic large vessel occlusion, such as intracranial hemorrhage, may also benefit from triage to Comprehensive Stroke Centers. Prehospital triage is more complex than ever and guidelines, tools, and systems continue to evolve.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent advances in endovascular thrombectomy have made acute ischemic stroke due to a large vessel occlusion more treatable than ever. Rapid access to treatment remains paramount and multiple large vessel occlusion prediction scales have been created to enhance prehospital identification and triage of these patients. This review summarizes the current state of large vessel occlusion prediction scales, proposes a set of ideal scale features, and discusses the future of these scales and prehospital neurological emergency response systems. RECENT FINDINGS: A meta-analysis of the available data concluded that none of the currently published scales are more accurate than the others. However, other studies provide insight into important qualitative features beyond accuracy. At present, only a few large vessel occlusion prediction scales have been studied in the necessary prehospital suspected strokepatient population. Among these small studies, 26-51% of patients identified by scales had large vessel occlusions and 63-84% qualified for triage to a Comprehensive Stroke Center. Valuable scale features include binary scoring, inclusion of gaze deviation and arm weakness, exclusion of neglect, and prehospital validation in a suspected stroke cohort. Patients with neurological emergencies that mimic large vessel occlusion, such as intracranial hemorrhage, may also benefit from triage to Comprehensive Stroke Centers. Prehospital triage is more complex than ever and guidelines, tools, and systems continue to evolve.
Authors: Karim D Mahmoud; Youlan L Gu; Maarten W Nijsten; Ronald de Vos; Wybe Nieuwland; Felix Zijlstra; Hans L Hillege; Iwan C van der Horst; Bart Jgl de Smet Journal: Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care Date: 2013-06
Authors: Benjamin Martinez; John T Owings; Christopher Hector; Paige Hargrove; Shoichiro Tanaka; Margaret Moore; Patrick Greiffenstein; Joseph Giaimo; Shahrzad Talebinejad; John P Hunt Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Ali Reza Noorian; Nerses Sanossian; Kristina Shkirkova; David S Liebeskind; Marc Eckstein; Samuel J Stratton; Franklin D Pratt; Robin Conwit; Fiona Chatfield; Latisha K Sharma; Lucas Restrepo; Miguel Valdes-Sueiras; May Kim-Tenser; Sidney Starkman; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jennifer N Llanes; Chelsea S Kidwell; Sidney Starkman; Megan C Leary; Marc Eckstein; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: Prehosp Emerg Care Date: 2004 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Bijen Nazliel; Sidney Starkman; David S Liebeskind; Bruce Ovbiagele; Doojin Kim; Nerses Sanossian; Latisha Ali; Brian Buck; Pablo Villablanca; Fernando Vinuela; Gary Duckwiler; Reza Jahan; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-06-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Mohamed S Teleb; Anna Ver Hage; Jaqueline Carter; Mahesh V Jayaraman; Ryan A McTaggart Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Mehul D Patel; Jackie Thompson; José G Cabañas; Jefferson G Williams; Erin Lewis; Michael Bachman; Mahmoud Al Masry; Charles LaVigne; Leonardo Morantes; Tibor Becske; Omar Kass-Hout Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Nancy Glober; Michael Supples; Sarah Persaud; David Kim; Mark Liao; Michele Glidden; Dan O'Donnell; Christopher Tainter; Malaz Boustani; Andreia Alexander Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Roy El Koussa; Sarah Linder; Alicia Quayson; Shawn Banash; James J MacNeal; Parshva Shah; Mariaelana Brenner; Ross Levine; Osama O Zaidat; Vibhav Bansal Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-08-03 Impact factor: 4.086