Oral Presentation Asia Pacific Stroke Conference 2024

To repeat or not to repeat: Association of repeat in-hospital CT-imaging after mobile stroke unit assessment with endovascular thrombectomy treatment efficiency. (106715)

James L Barker 1 2 , Anna H Balabanski 1 3 , Cameron Williams 1 3 , Bernard Yan 1 , Vincent Thijs 4 , Davor Pavlin-Premrl 4 , Andrew Bivard 2 , Geoffrey Donnan 1 2 , Stephen M Davis 1 , Bruce CV Campbell 1
  1. Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  2. University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  3. Department of Neurology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
  4. Department of Neurology, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Background Mobile Stroke Units (MSU) substantially reduce time to intravenous thrombolytics and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). MSU computed tomography (CT)-scanners perform intracranial-only CT-angiography. Whether delaying EVT to perform arch-vertex CT-angiography on hospital arrival impacts EVT procedural metrics is unknown. We hypothesised that omitting cervical CT-angiography would be associated with improved time metrics without increasing procedural time or reducing first-pass reperfusion. 

Methods This multicentre retrospective analysis of the Melbourne MSU database included baseline demographics, time metrics, and procedural metrics, including the number of passes, for EVT-eligible patients at three comprehensive stroke centres in Victoria, Australia. Patients with or without acquisition of arch-vertex CT-angiography imaging prior to EVT were compared using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum.

Results Of 104 patients, 69 were re-scanned, and 35 bypassed the in-hospital CT to EVT. Baseline demographics, Glasgow Coma Scale and vascular territory, were well matched. Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was higher in the no-repeat CT group (median 21 vs 18, p=0.001). Median time from hospital presentation to arterial puncture (30 vs 49min, p<0.001), guide-catheter placement (42.5 vs 67.5min, p<0.001), and reperfusion (71 vs 89min, p=0.003) were faster in the no-repeat CT group. Median times from puncture to guide-catheter (13.5 vs 15min, p=0.50) and reperfusion (41 vs 39min, p=0.35) were similar between groups. First-pass reperfusion (55.4% vs 62% p=0.48) and median 90-day mRS (1 vs 3, p=0.199) was similar between groups.

Conclusion Omitting repeat CT was associated with reduced times to arterial puncture and reperfusion, but not increased procedure time or reduced first pass effect.