Factors influencing emergency delays in acute stroke management.

Early admission to hospital with minimum delay is a prerequisite for successful management of acute stroke. We sought to determine our local pre- and in-hospital factors influencing this delay. Time from onset of symptoms to admission (admission time) was prospectively documented during a 6-month period (December 2004 to May 2005) in patients consecutively admitted for an acute focal neurological deficit presented at arrival and of presumed vascular origin. Mode of transportation, patient's knowledge and correct recognition of stroke symptoms were assessed. Physicians contacted by the patients or their relatives were interviewed. The influence of referral patterns on in-hospital delays was further evaluated. Overall, 331 patients were included, 249 had an ischaemic and 37 a haemorrhagic stroke. Forty-five patients had a TIA with neurological symptoms subsiding within the first hours after admission. Median admission time was 3 hours 20 minutes. Transportation by ambulance significantly shortened admission delays in comparison with the patient's own means (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.6-3.7). The only other factor associated with reduced delays was awareness of stroke (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.9). Early in-hospital delays, specifically time to request CT-scan and time to call the neurologist, were shorter when the patient was referred by his family or to a lesser extent by an emergency physician than by the family physician (p < 0.04 and p < 0.01, respectively) and were shorter when he was transported by ambulance than by his own means (p < 0.01). Transportation by ambulance and referral by the patient or family significantly improved admission delays and early in-hospital management. Correct recognition of stroke symptoms further contributed to significant shortening of admission time. Educational programmes should take these findings into account.

Blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol targets for prevention of recurrent strokes and cognitive decline in the hypertensive patient: design of the European Society of Hypertension-Chinese Hypertension League Stroke in Hypertension Optimal Treatment randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The SBP values to be achieved by antihypertensive therapy in order to maximize reduction of cardiovascular outcomes are unknown; neither is it clear whether in patients with a previous cardiovascular event, the optimal values are lower than in the low-to-moderate risk hypertensive patients, or a more cautious blood pressure (BP) reduction should be obtained. Because of the uncertainty whether 'the lower the better' or the 'J-curve' hypothesis is correct, the European Society of Hypertension and the Chinese Hypertension League have promoted a randomized trial comparing antihypertensive treatment strategies aiming at three different SBP targets in hypertensive patients with a recent stroke or transient ischaemic attack. As the optimal level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level is also unknown in these patients, LDL-C-lowering has been included in the design. PROTOCOL DESIGN: The European Society of Hypertension-Chinese Hypertension League Stroke in Hypertension Optimal Treatment trial is a prospective multinational, randomized trial with a 3 × 2 factorial design comparing: three different SBP targets (1, <145-135; 2, <135-125; 3, <125 mmHg); two different LDL-C targets (target A, 2.8-1.8; target B, <1.8 mmol/l). The trial is to be conducted on 7500 patients aged at least 65 years (2500 in Europe, 5000 in China) with hypertension and a stroke or transient ischaemic attack 1-6 months before randomization. Antihypertensive and statin treatments will be initiated or modified using suitable registered agents chosen by the investigators, in order to maintain patients within the randomized SBP and LDL-C windows. All patients will be followed up every 3 months for BP and every 6 months for LDL-C. Ambulatory BP will be measured yearly. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome is time to stroke (fatal and non-fatal). Important secondary outcomes are: time to first major cardiovascular event; cognitive decline (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and dementia. All major outcomes will be adjudicated by committees blind to randomized allocation. A Data and Safety Monitoring Board has open access to data and can recommend trial interruption for safety. SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION: It has been calculated that 925 patients would reach the primary outcome after a mean 4-year follow-up, and this should provide at least 80% power to detect a 25% stroke difference between SBP targets and a 20% difference between LDL-C targets.

International survey of acute stroke imaging used to make revascularization treatment decisions.

BACKGROUND: To assess the differences across continental regions in terms of stroke imaging obtained for making acute revascularization therapy decisions, and to identify obstacles to participating in randomized trials involving multimodal imaging. METHODS: STroke Imaging Repository (STIR) and Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA)-Imaging circulated an online survey through its website, through the websites of national professional societies from multiple countries as well as through email distribution lists from STIR and the above mentioned societies. RESULTS: We received responses from 223 centers (2 from Africa, 38 from Asia, 10 from Australia, 101 from Europe, 4 from Middle East, 55 from North America, 13 from South America). In combination, the sites surveyed administered acute revascularization therapy to a total of 25,326 acute stroke patients in 2012. Seventy-three percent of these patients received intravenous (i.v.) tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), and 27%, endovascular therapy. Vascular imaging was routinely obtained in 79% (152/193) of sites for endovascular therapy decisions, and also as part of standard IV tPA treatment decisions at 46% (92/198) of sites. Modality, availability and use of acute vascular and perfusion imaging before revascularization varied substantially between geographical areas. The main obstacles to participate in randomized trials involving multimodal imaging included: mainly insufficient research support and staff (50%, 79/158) and infrequent use of multimodal imaging (27%, 43/158) . CONCLUSION: There were significant variations among sites and geographical areas in terms of stroke imaging work-up used tomake decisions both for intravenous and endovascular revascularization. Clinical trials using advanced imaging as a selection tool for acute revascularization therapy should address the need for additional resources and technical support, and take into consideration the lack of routine use of such techniques in trial planning.