Search

Background Our goal is to evaluate whether the administration of thrombolytic treatment has varying effects on clinical and radiological outcomes in patients with large‐vessel occlusion stroke, based on the type of stroke center where the treatment was given (thrombectomy‐capable center versus local stroke center). Methods We included patients with an acute ischemic large‐vessel occlusion stroke who were directly admitted to thrombectomy‐capable centers and treated with endovascular thrombectomy, or were transferred from local stroke centers as thrombectomy candidates, in Catalonia, Spain, between 2017 and 2021. The primary outcome was the shift analysis on the modified Rankin scale score at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included death at 90 days and the rate of parenchymal hemorrhage and successful reperfusion. Inverse‐probability weighting clustered at the type of stroke center was used to estimate the effects. Results The analysis included 2268 patients directly admitted to thrombectomy‐capable centers, of whom 975 (49%) were treated with thrombolysis, and 938 patients transferred from local stroke centers, of whom 580 (66%) were treated with thrombolysis and 616 (67%) were treated with thrombectomy. Mean age was 72 (SD ±13) years, median National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score was 17 (interquartile range, 12–21), and 1363 patients were women (48%). Patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis were younger, had shorter time from onset to first image, higher Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score, and lower rates of wake‐up stroke, atrial fibrillation, and anticoagulation intake. Patients treated with thrombolysis had better functional outcome at 90 days, with no difference between patients directly admitted to thrombectomy‐capable centers (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR], 1.50 [95% CI, 1.24–1.81]) and patients transferred from local stroke centers (acOR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.04–2.01]). Patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis had lower death rate, higher rate of parenchymal hematoma, and similar rate of successful reperfusion, with no difference according to type of center (Pinteraction>0.1). Conclusion Administration of intravenous thrombolysis in patients with a large‐vessel stroke with intention of thrombectomy was associated with lower degrees of disability, lower death rate, and higher rates of parenchymal hematoma both in thrombectomy‐capable centers and in local stroke centers.

Background Door‐in–door‐out time (DIDO) in nonthrombectomy stroke centers is a key performance indicator in acute stroke care. Nonetheless, the relative importance of DIDO on outcome in patients transferred for endovascular treatment (EVT) is not widely known. Therefore, we aim to explore the association between DIDO and clinical outcome according to onset to reperfusion time in patients undergoing EVT. Methods Observational multicenter study including patients transferred to a thrombectomy‐capable center from a local stroke center who underwent thrombectomy. The primary outcome was favorable clinical outcome, as evaluated by a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 at 3 months. We evaluated the association between DIDO and clinical outcome according to onset to reperfusion time and factors related to shorter DIDO time. Results Among 2710 patients transferred for thrombectomy evaluation, 970 (43.8%) patients received EVT. Median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and DIDO time were 12 (interquartile range [IQR], 6–19) and 83 minutes (IQR, 66–108), respectively. Among patients undergoing EVT, no association was found between DIDO and clinical outcome. Considering only patients treated in the early time window (onset to reperfusion time ≤240 minutes), patients with favorable outcome had a shorter DIDO (60 [IQR, 52–68] versus 73 [IQR, 61–83] minutes; P=0.013). A receiver operating characteristic curve identified a cutoff of 67 minutes of DIDO time that better predicted favorable outcome (sensitivity, 70%; specificity, 73%; area under the curve, 0.741). A multivariate analysis showed that DIDO ≤67 minutes emerged as an independent factor associated with favorable outcome (odds ratio [OR], 5.29 [95% CI, 1.38–20.27]; P=0.015). Door to computed tomography time was the only factor associated with DIDO ≤67 minutes (OR, 1.113 [95% CI, 1.018–1.261]; P=0.022) in a multivariate analysis in this time frame. Conclusions In transferred patients undergoing EVT, DIDO has a significant impact on clinical outcome, mainly in the first hours from stroke onset. A benchmark of 67 minutes in DIDO time is proposed. Shorter door to computed tomography time appears to be an independent factor associated to achieve DIDO time ≤67 minutes. Measures to optimize workflow into referral centers are warranted.