Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (2)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- thrombolysis (2) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Background: The objective of the STREAM Trial was to evaluate the effect of simulation training on process times in acute stroke care.
Methods: The multicenter prospective interventional STREAM Trial was conducted between 10/2017 and 04/2019 at seven tertiary care neurocenters in Germany with a pre- and post-interventional observation phase. We recorded patient characteristics, acute stroke care process times, stroke team composition and simulation experience for consecutive direct-to-center patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular therapy (EVT). The intervention consisted of a composite intervention centered around stroke-specific in situ simulation training. Primary outcome measure was the ‘door-to-needle’ time (DTN) for IVT. Secondary outcome measures included process times of EVT and measures taken to streamline the pre-existing treatment algorithm.
Results: The effect of the STREAM intervention on the process times of all acute stroke operations was neutral. However, secondary analyses showed a DTN reduction of 5 min from 38 min pre-intervention (interquartile range [IQR] 25–43 min) to 33 min (IQR 23–39 min, p = 0.03) post-intervention achieved by simulation-experienced stroke teams. Concerning EVT, we found significantly shorter door-to-groin times in patients who were treated by teams with simulation experience as compared to simulation-naive teams in the post-interventional phase (−21 min, simulation-naive: 95 min, IQR 69–111 vs. simulation-experienced: 74 min, IQR 51–92, p = 0.04).
Conclusion: An intervention combining workflow refinement and simulation-based stroke team training has the potential to improve process times in acute stroke care.
Context: Despite overwhelming evidence for endovascular therapy in anterior circulation ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion, data regarding the treatment of acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) are still equivocal. The BASICS trial failed to show an advantage of endovascular therapy (EVT) over best medical treatment (BMT). In contrast, data from the recently published BASILAR registry showed a better outcome in patients receiving EVT.
Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of EVT plus BMT vs. BMT alone in acute BAO.
Methods: We analyzed the clinical course and short-term outcomes of patients with radiologically confirmed BAO dichotomized by BMT plus EVT or BMT only as documented in a state-wide prospective registry of consecutive patients hospitalized due to acute stroke. The primary endpoint was a favorable functional outcome (mRS 0–3) at hospital discharge assessed as common odds ratio using binary logistic regression. Secondary subgroup analyses and propensity score matching were added. Safety outcomes included mortality, the rate of intracerebral hemorrhages, and complications during hospitalization.
Results: We included 403 patients with acute BAO (2017–2019). A total of 270 patients (67%) were treated with BMT plus EVT and 133 patients (33%) were treated with BMT only. A favorable outcome (mRS 0–3) was observed in 33.8% of the BMT and 26.7% of the BMT plus EVT group [OR.770, CI (0.50–1.2)]. Subgroup analyses for patients with a NIHSS score > 10 at admission to the hospital revealed a benefit from EVT [OR 3.05, CI (1.03–9.01)].
Conclusions: In this prospective, quasi population-based registry of patients hospitalized with acute BAO, BMT plus EVT was not superior to BMT alone. Nevertheless, our results suggest that severely affected BAO patients are more likely to benefit from EVT.