Natalia Pérez de la Ossa1,2, Sònia Abilleira2, Tudor G Jovin3, Álvaro García-Tornel4, Xavier Jimenez5, Xabier Urra6, Pere Cardona7, Dolores Cocho8, Francisco Purroy9, Joaquin Serena10, Luis San Román Manzanera11, Rosa Maria Vivanco-Hidalgo2, Mercè Salvat-Plana2, Angel Chamorro6, Miquel Gallofré2, Carlos A Molina4, Erik Cobo12, Antoni Davalos1, Marc Ribo4. 1. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain. 2. Stroke Programme, Catalan Health Department, Agency for Health Quality and Assessment of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Neurological Institute, Cooper University Hospital, Camden, New Jersey. 4. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebrón, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Emergency Medical Services of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain. 7. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Universitari Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain. 8. Neurology Department, Hospital Granollers, Granollers, Spain. 9. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, Spain. 10. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, Hospital Josep Trueta, Girona, Spain. 11. Department of Neuroradiology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Statistics and Operational Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
Importance: In nonurban areas with limited access to thrombectomy-capable centers, optimal prehospital transport strategies in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke are unknown. Objective: To determine whether, in nonurban areas, direct transport to a thrombectomy-capable center is beneficial compared with transport to the closest local stroke center. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, population-based, cluster-randomized trial including 1401 patients with suspected acute large-vessel occlusion stroke attended by emergency medical services in areas where the closest local stroke center was not capable of performing thrombectomy in Catalonia, Spain, between March 2017 and June 2020. The date of final follow-up was September 2020. Interventions: Transportation to a thrombectomy-capable center (n = 688) or the closest local stroke center (n = 713). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was disability at 90 days based on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS; scores range from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) in the target population of patients with ischemic stroke. There were 11 secondary outcomes, including rate of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator administration and thrombectomy in the target population and 90-day mortality in the safety population of all randomized patients. Results: Enrollment was halted for futility following a second interim analysis. The 1401 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis, of whom 1369 (98%) consented to participate and were included in the as-randomized analysis (56% men; median age, 75 [IQR, 65-83] years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 17 [IQR, 11-21]); 949 (69%) comprised the target ischemic stroke population included in the primary analysis. For the primary outcome in the target population, median mRS score was 3 (IQR, 2-5) vs 3 (IQR, 2-5) (adjusted common odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29). Of 11 reported secondary outcomes, 8 showed no significant difference. Compared with patients first transported to local stroke centers, patients directly transported to thrombectomy-capable centers had significantly lower odds of receiving intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (in the target population, 229/482 [47.5%] vs 282/467 [60.4%]; OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76) and significantly higher odds of receiving thrombectomy (in the target population, 235/482 [48.8%] vs 184/467 [39.4%]; OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.89). Mortality at 90 days in the safety population was not significantly different between groups (188/688 [27.3%] vs 194/713 [27.2%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18). Conclusions and Relevance: In nonurban areas in Catalonia, Spain, there was no significant difference in 90-day neurological outcomes between transportation to a local stroke center vs a thrombectomy-capable referral center in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke. These findings require replication in other settings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02795962.
Importance: In nonurban areas with limited access to thrombectomy-capable centers, optimal prehospital transport strategies in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke are unknown. Objective: To determine whether, in nonurban areas, direct transport to a thrombectomy-capable center is beneficial compared with transport to the closest local stroke center. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, population-based, cluster-randomized trial including 1401 patients with suspected acute large-vessel occlusion stroke attended by emergency medical services in areas where the closest local stroke center was not capable of performing thrombectomy in Catalonia, Spain, between March 2017 and June 2020. The date of final follow-up was September 2020. Interventions: Transportation to a thrombectomy-capable center (n = 688) or the closest local stroke center (n = 713). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was disability at 90 days based on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS; scores range from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) in the target population of patients with ischemic stroke. There were 11 secondary outcomes, including rate of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator administration and thrombectomy in the target population and 90-day mortality in the safety population of all randomized patients. Results: Enrollment was halted for futility following a second interim analysis. The 1401 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis, of whom 1369 (98%) consented to participate and were included in the as-randomized analysis (56% men; median age, 75 [IQR, 65-83] years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 17 [IQR, 11-21]); 949 (69%) comprised the target ischemic stroke population included in the primary analysis. For the primary outcome in the target population, median mRS score was 3 (IQR, 2-5) vs 3 (IQR, 2-5) (adjusted common odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29). Of 11 reported secondary outcomes, 8 showed no significant difference. Compared with patients first transported to local stroke centers, patients directly transported to thrombectomy-capable centers had significantly lower odds of receiving intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (in the target population, 229/482 [47.5%] vs 282/467 [60.4%]; OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76) and significantly higher odds of receiving thrombectomy (in the target population, 235/482 [48.8%] vs 184/467 [39.4%]; OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.89). Mortality at 90 days in the safety population was not significantly different between groups (188/688 [27.3%] vs 194/713 [27.2%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18). Conclusions and Relevance: In nonurban areas in Catalonia, Spain, there was no significant difference in 90-day neurological outcomes between transportation to a local stroke center vs a thrombectomy-capable referral center in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke. These findings require replication in other settings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02795962.
Authors: David Carrera; Montse Gorchs; Marisol Querol; Sònia Abilleira; Marc Ribó; Mònica Millán; Anna Ramos; Pedro Cardona; Xabier Urra; Ana Rodríguez-Campello; Luis Prats-Sánchez; Francisco Purroy; Joaquín Serena; David Cánovas; Josep Zaragoza-Brunet; Jerzy A Krupinski; Xavier Ustrell; Júlia Saura; Sonia García; Maria Àngela Mora; Xavier Jiménez; Antoni Dávalos; Natalia Pérez de la Ossa Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2018-12-22 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Martijne H C Duvekot; Esmee Venema; Anouk D Rozeman; Walid Moudrous; Frédérique H Vermeij; Marileen Biekart; Hester F Lingsma; Lisette Maasland; Annemarie D Wijnhoud; Laus J M M Mulder; Kees C L Alblas; Roeland P J van Eijkelenburg; Bianca I Buijck; Jeannette Bakker; Aarnout S Plaisier; Jan-Hein Hensen; Geert J Lycklama À Nijeholt; Pieter Jan van Doormaal; Adriaan C G M van Es; Aad van der Lugt; Henk Kerkhoff; Diederik W J Dippel; Bob Roozenbeek Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; Mayank Goyal; Alain Bonafe; Hans-Christoph Diener; Elad I Levy; Vitor M Pereira; Gregory W Albers; Christophe Cognard; David J Cohen; Werner Hacke; Olav Jansen; Tudor G Jovin; Heinrich P Mattle; Raul G Nogueira; Adnan H Siddiqui; Dileep R Yavagal; Blaise W Baxter; Thomas G Devlin; Demetrius K Lopes; Vivek K Reddy; Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont; Oliver C Singer; Reza Jahan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Peter J Mitchell; Timothy J Kleinig; Helen M Dewey; Leonid Churilov; Nawaf Yassi; Bernard Yan; Richard J Dowling; Mark W Parsons; Thomas J Oxley; Teddy Y Wu; Mark Brooks; Marion A Simpson; Ferdinand Miteff; Christopher R Levi; Martin Krause; Timothy J Harrington; Kenneth C Faulder; Brendan S Steinfort; Miriam Priglinger; Timothy Ang; Rebecca Scroop; P Alan Barber; Ben McGuinness; Tissa Wijeratne; Thanh G Phan; Winston Chong; Ronil V Chandra; Christopher F Bladin; Monica Badve; Henry Rice; Laetitia de Villiers; Henry Ma; Patricia M Desmond; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Olvert A Berkhemer; Puck S S Fransen; Debbie Beumer; Lucie A van den Berg; Hester F Lingsma; Albert J Yoo; Wouter J Schonewille; Jan Albert Vos; Paul J Nederkoorn; Marieke J H Wermer; Marianne A A van Walderveen; Julie Staals; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Jacques A van Oostayen; Geert J Lycklama à Nijeholt; Jelis Boiten; Patrick A Brouwer; Bart J Emmer; Sebastiaan F de Bruijn; Lukas C van Dijk; L Jaap Kappelle; Rob H Lo; Ewoud J van Dijk; Joost de Vries; Paul L M de Kort; Willem Jan J van Rooij; Jan S P van den Berg; Boudewijn A A M van Hasselt; Leo A M Aerden; René J Dallinga; Marieke C Visser; Joseph C J Bot; Patrick C Vroomen; Omid Eshghi; Tobien H C M L Schreuder; Roel J J Heijboer; Koos Keizer; Alexander V Tielbeek; Heleen M den Hertog; Dick G Gerrits; Renske M van den Berg-Vos; Giorgos B Karas; Ewout W Steyerberg; H Zwenneke Flach; Henk A Marquering; Marieke E S Sprengers; Sjoerd F M Jenniskens; Ludo F M Beenen; René van den Berg; Peter J Koudstaal; Wim H van Zwam; Yvo B W E M Roos; Aad van der Lugt; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Charles B L M Majoie; Diederik W J Dippel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Edward C Jauch; Lee H Schwamm; Peter D Panagos; Jolene Barbazzeni; Robert Dickson; Robert Dunne; Jenevra Foley; Justin F Fraser; Geoffrey Lassers; Christian Martin-Gill; Suzanne O'Brien; Mark Pinchalk; Shyam Prabhakaran; Christopher T Richards; Peter Taillac; Albert W Tsai; Anil Yallapragada Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Esmee Venema; Adrien E Groot; Hester F Lingsma; Wouter Hinsenveld; Kilian M Treurniet; Vicky Chalos; Sanne M Zinkstok; Maxim J H L Mulder; Inger R de Ridder; Henk A Marquering; Wouter J Schonewille; Marieke J H Wermer; Charles B L M Majoie; Yvo B W E M Roos; Diederik W J Dippel; Jonathan M Coutinho; Bob Roozenbeek Journal: Stroke Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jan Hendrik Schaefer; Natalia Kurka; Fee Keil; Marlies Wagner; Helmuth Steinmetz; Waltraud Pfeilschifter; Ferdinand O Bohmann Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-08-23 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Kevin Hädrich; Pawel Krukowski; Jessica Barlinn; Matthias Gawlitza; Johannes C Gerber; Volker Puetz; Jennifer Linn; Daniel P O Kaiser Journal: Healthcare (Basel) Date: 2022-08-12