evc isqumico
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
1/22
Acute ischemic stroke: emergentevaluation and management
R. Jason Thurman, MD*, Edward C. Jauch, MD, MSDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati, 231 Albert B. Sabin Way,
Cincinnati, OH 45267-0769, USA
As the third leading cause of death and number one effectuation of adult
disability in the United States and industrialized Europe, stroke inflicts a
devastating physical, emotional, and financial toll on its victims, their fam-
ilies, and healthcare systems all over the world. In 1998 alone, the U.S. pop-
ulation endured more than 600,000 strokes resulting in 158,448 deaths and
the loss of functional independence for countless others [1]. Until recently,
care for those acutely afflicted by stroke has been limited to supportive man-agement with little hope of affecting a positive outcome. The last decade has
seen the emergence of new treatments for acute stroke, however, energizing
stroke care providers and spreading a sense of optimism among those who
seek to alter the course of this terrible disease. Because effective stroke treat-
ment is extremely time-dependent, it is paramount that emergency physi-
cians understand and excel in their critical role at the forefront of stroke
management.
Epidemiology
With an estimated 750,000 new strokes and more than 1 million hospital-
izations occurring in the United States each year, the importance of stroke
as a major cause of morbidity and mortality cannot be overemphasized.
Approximately 8% of those suffering an acute stroke die within 30 days,
whereas approximately 29% of stroke patients are dead at 1 year. Of those
who survive, 16% of stroke patients require institutional care; another 31%
require assistance caring for themselves, and 20% of stroke survivors need
walking assistance [2]. Up to one third of stroke survivors suffer from majordepression, and depression is common in care providers also. The direct and
Emerg Med Clin N Am
20 (2002) 609630
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (R.J. Thurman).
0733-8627/02/$ - see front matter 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 7 3 3 - 8 6 2 7 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 1 4 - 7
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
2/22
indirect economic impact of acute stroke in the United States is no less
severe, with an estimated cost of $43 billion per year.
Pathophysiology
Strokes are classified as either ischemic or hemorrhagic, with nearly 85%
being ischemic. Ischemic strokes are further divided into thrombotic strokes
(60% of ischemic strokes), caused by in situ cerebrocervical artery occlusions
usually secondary to atherosclerotic lesions, and embolic strokes (40% of
ischemic strokes), caused by obstructive emboli from proximal vessel or car-
diac sources [2]. Both subtypes of ischemic stroke result in the acute inter-
ruption of arterial blood flow to a dependent area of brain parenchyma.
Once an arterial occlusion has occurred, a heterogeneous area of hypoper-
fused tissue is created. A central zone of ischemic tissue known as the core
is completely deprived of critical oxygen and glucose delivery, and irreversi-
ble neuronal injury begins within minutes. Surrounding the core are areas of
markedly decreased perfusion where stunned brain parenchyma receives a
diminished blood supply from cerebral collateral vessels and potentially
from residual arterial flow. This area, known as the ischemic penumbra, is
potentially salvageable if significant arterial flow can be quickly restored
and thus it is the therapeutic target of most emergent stroke treatments
[3,4]. Through multiple animal studies and recent clinical experience, the
degree of neuronal injury is clearly a function of the extent and duration
of ischemia [5]. It is estimated that approximately 6 hours represents the
window of opportunity available before the penumbra is lost and irreversible
neurologic devastation occurs [4,5]. This highlights the need for speed
and efficiency in the detection of ischemic stroke symptoms, activation
of emergency medical services (EMS), emergent transport of the patient,
and rapid assessment and treatment in the emergency department. These
essential elements of acute stroke care are well summarized by the seven
step stroke chain of survival known as the Seven Ds (Table 1) [6].
Virtually every link in the chain involves the skills and efforts of emergency
physicians.
Table 1
The Seven Ds of acute stroke management
Detection The awareness of stroke signs and symptoms by the patient or bystanders
Dispatch Activation of EMS systems, priority dispatch, and rapid EMS response
Delivery Rapid transport to the appropriate facility, en-route assessment, and
prehospital notification
Door Emergency department triage
Data Emergency department evaluation (neurologic evaluationNIH Stroke
Scale, glucose, head CT, etc)
Decision Selection of appropriate therapy and interventions
Drug Delivery of therapeutics
610 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
3/22
Prehospital management
Successful stroke treatment begins with the prompt recognition of stroke
symptoms and the immediate initiation of an EMS response. First respond-
ers are of paramount importance in obtaining history and establishing the
exact time of symptom onset, which can be quite elusive once the patient has
left the scene and bystanders are unavailable for interview.
After ensuring stability of the ABCs (airway, breathing, and circulatory
system), prehospital care providers move to secondary survey, which in-
cludes a simple standardized assessment of neurologic function. One of the
first such prehospital tools, the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (Table 2)
and others like it have proven sensitive and specific in detecting anterior cir-
culation strokes [7,8].
While en route, intravenous (IV) access is obtained, oxygen is adminis-
tered if needed, and blood glucose is checked. When stroke is strongly sus-
pected, an advanced notification is promptly made to the receiving hospital.
This critical action allows ED personnel to prepare for the arrival of the
patient, coordinate ancillary services to ensure that diagnostic imaging is
readily available, and alert the local stroke team if one is available [9]. Noti-
fication and preparation alone can save significant time. The importance of
this vital step is well underscored by the recent data suggesting that a mere
2030 minute delay in thrombolytic treatment of stroke may diminish the
chances of clinical improvement by approximately 10% [10].
Emergency department management
Initial assessment
On arrival, the acute stroke patient is placed in a high acuity area and is
given the same triage priority as unstable trauma or a critical cardiac
patient. Assessment of vital signs, establishment of IV access, initiation ofcardiac monitoring, pulse oximetry measurement, and confirmation of
blood glucose are done while obtaining an accurate and focused history.
Determining the exact time of onset of the stroke symptoms along with
Table 2
The Cincinnati prehospital stroke scalea
Facial droop Have patient smile or show teeth
Normal Both sides move equally
Abnormal One side does not move as wellArm drift Patient closes eyes and holds both arms out
Normal Both sides move equally or no movement at all
Abnormal One side does not move as well or drifts downward
Speech Have patient say You cant teach an old dog new tricks
Normal Patient uses correct words without slurring
Abnormal Slurs words, uses inappropriate words, or is unable to speak
a Any one or more abnormal finding is suggestive of acute stroke.
611R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
4/22
findings of any events surrounding the episode such as trauma, seizure activ-
ity, or migraine headache is the top priority of the emergency physician.
EMS personnel, family members, or bystanders are valuable sources ofinformation because the patient may be uncertain regarding the onset of the
stroke, completely unaware of the ongoing symptoms, or may be simply
unable to verbally communicate.
Supplemental history helps elicit any risk factors for acute ischemic
stroke (Table 3). Although hypertension is the most important and preva-
lent risk factor for acute ischemic stroke [11], history of prior transient ische-
mic attacks (TIAs) carries significant risk, as well [12].
Physical examinationAfter assessing the vital signs, the head and neck are examined for any
evidence of trauma. Carotid auscultation is performed to listen for bruits.
The presence of cardiac arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, an important
risk factor for cardioembolic stroke, is sought. A heart murmur may indi-
cate valvular problems [2]. Unequal pulses in the extremities might suggest
the presence of aortic dissection.
The importance of conducting a thorough but focused neurologic exami-
nation is underscored. Performed quickly and easily, the National Institutes
of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) forms the basis of the focused neurologicexamination (see Appendix A). The scale focuses on six major categories
of the neurologic examination: (1) overall level of consciousness, (2) visual
function, (3) motor skills, (4) sensation and neglect, (5) language, and (6)
cerebellar integrity [7].
The NIHSS provides an insight into the location and the size of the
underlying lesion in common ischemic stroke syndromes and even helps
identify some subtle stroke syndromes (Table 4) [13]. The scale is a strong
initial predictor of ultimate clinical outcome [14]. It also helps identify those
patients likely to respond favorably to treatment and those with increasedrisk for hemorrhagic complications after thrombolytic therapy. Widely used
by neurologists and stroke teams, NIHSS provides a powerful means of
communication between ED physicians and their consultants.
Table 3
Risk factors for ischemic stroke [7]
Modifiable Nonmodifiable
Atrial fibrillation/heart disease Age
Carotid stenosis
Diabetes mellitus Gender (male[female)
Hyperlipidemia
Hypertension Race (African American[Caucasian)
Smoking
Heavy alcohol use History of prior stroke
History of transient ischemic attacks
612 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
5/22
Table4
Selecteduncommonclinicalstrokesyndromes[13]
Syndrome
Arterialocclusionsite
Clinicalmanifestations
Lateralmedullarysyn
drome
(Wallenburgsyndro
me)
Posteriorinferiorcerebellarartery
(oftenlesioninvertebralartery)
a)Ipsilaterallimbataxia,b)Ipsilaterallossoffacialcu
taneous
sensation,c)Hiccup,d)Ip
silateralHomesyndrome,e)Nausea/
vomiting/nystagmus,f)Con
tralaterallossofpainandtemperature
sensation,g)Dysphagia,h)
Hoarsenesswithipsilateralvocalcord
paralysis,i)Lossofipsilater
alpharyngealreflex
Lateralinferiorpontinesyndrome
Anteriorinferiorcerebellarartery
(af)Aboveplus:g)Ipsilate
ralfacialparalysis,h)Deafnessand
tinnitus,i)Ipsilateralgazep
aralysis
Lateralmidpontinesy
ndrome
Shortcircum
ferentialartery
(af)Aboveplus:g)Trigeminalnerveimpairment:Chewingd
ifficulty
(bilaterallesions)oripsilateraljawdeviationwithmouth
opened
(unilaterallesions)
Lateralsuperiorpontinesyndrome
Superiorcer
ebellarartery
(af)Aboveplus:g)Nospecificcranialnervesigns
Medialmedullarysyn
drome
Paramedian
branchesofbasilarartery
a)Contralateralhemiparesis,b)Contralaterallossofproprio
ception
andvibratorysensoryfun
ction,c)Ipsilaterallimbata
xia,d)
Ipsilateraltongueweakness
Medialinferiorpontin
esyndrome
Paramedian
branchesofbasilarartery
(ac)Aboveplus:d)Ipsilater
algazeparalysis,e)Ipsilaterallateral
rectusparalysis,f)Gaze-evo
kednystagmus
Medialsuperiorpontinesyndrome
Paramedian
branchesofbasilarartery
(ac)Aboveplus:d)Internuclea
rophthalmoplegia,e)Palatalmy
oclonus
Ventralmidbrainsyndrome
(Webersyndrome)
Paramedian
branchesofbasilarartery
a)Contralateralhemiparesis,
b)Contralateralsupranuclea
rfacial
paresis,c)Ipsilateraloculom
otornervepalsy
Centralmidbrainsyndrome
(tegmentalsyndrom
e)
Paramedian
branchesofbasilarartery
a)Ipsilateraloculomotornervepalsy,b)Hemichoreaofcontralateral
limbs,c)Contralaterallossofcutaneoussensationand
proprioception
Dorsalmidbrainsynd
rome
(Parinaudsyndrome)
Usuallycausedbycompression
byextra-a
xiallesion(pinealoma)
Paralysisofupwardgaze
Locked-insyndrome
Basilararter
yocclusioncausing
bilateralv
entralpontinelesions
Completequadriplegia,inabilitytospeak,andlossofallfacial
movementsdespitenormal
levelofconsciousness:patien
tsmay
communicatewitheyeorey
elidmovements
613R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
6/22
Level of consciousness is evaluated first. This includes an overall assess-
ment of the patients level of awareness and assignment to a category (alert,
drowsy, stuporous, or coma) along with a scoring of the patients ability toanswer simple questions and follow commands (Items 1a1c). Gaze and vis-
ual fields are assessed next as the examiner looks for evidence of gaze palsy or
a visual field cut (Items 2 and 3). These are best detected with a careful extra-
ocular movement examination and visual field testing by confrontation
(examiner faces patient and tests visual fields by bringing moving fingers in
slowly from the sides until patient detects them). The presence of a facial
palsy is sought (Item 4) by having the patient show teeth, raise eyebrows, and
squeeze eyes shut, and the differentiation between a central facial palsy (brow
spared) and peripheral facial palsy (brow and lower face involved) is noted.Motor strength is checked in all extremities (Items 58) and graded 04
according to the scale. Evaluating for pronator drift may reveal subtle
strength deficits. The examiner watches for any sign of slight pronation of the
forearm while having the patient stand (if possible) with eyes closed and arms
held outstretched 90 with palms up for 10 seconds. If the patient cannot
stand, this may be done in the same manner with the supine patient holding
the arms out 45. If no drift is present, the score is 0; some drift indicates at
least mild weakness and a score of 1 is assigned in the NIH scale. If the
patient has greater drift of the arm so that resistance against gravity isimpaired, a score of 2 is assigned. The presence of some movement, (but any
movement against gravity is absent) receives a score of 3. Absence of any
movement yields a score of 4.
Next, the extremities are quickly assessed for evidence of ataxia with
finger-to-nose coordination and heel-to-shin testing (Item 9), followed by
a rapid gross sensory examination of the face and extremities (Item 10).
The patient is then examined for evidence of neglect (the patient may un-
consciously ignore half of his or her body or the surroundings with non-
dominant hemisphere strokes) and extinction (the patient may notice astimulus of only one side of the body with simultaneous testing of both sides
if the sensory cortex is ischemic). Finally, the examiner seeks evidence of
dysarthria (Item 12) and language deficits (Item 13). By asking simple ques-
tions and having the patient attempt to repeat simple phrases, signs of dys-
arthria (slurred speech), receptive aphasia (the patient cannot comprehend
language), expressive aphasia (the patient can understand but cannot
express language), or global aphasia (the patient can neither understand nor
express language) are readily identified.
Emergent CT brain
High priority computed tomography (CT) scanning of the head is the
most important study done early in the course as most treatment algorithms
for acute stroke hinge on the presence or absence of intracranial blood on a
614 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
7/22
brain CT study. Emergent CT brain also helps rule out nonvascular lesions
of the brain [15]. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
Stroke (NINDS) recommend stroke evaluation time targets that call for adoor to CT completion time of 25 minutes and a door to CT interpretation
time of 45 minutes [6,7]. These time goals stress the need for the prepared-
ness, planning, and establishment of protocols designed to streamline care
of stroke patients into rapid care pathways.
Prompt and accurate interpretation of the CT scan is critical. An
adequately trained physician who has achieved a high level of sensitivity
in detecting evidence of intracranial blood assumes this responsibility [16].
Obvious early ischemic changes such as focal hypodensity often are not
observed on initial CT; however, the presence of subtle signs helps steertherapy (Table 5) [7]. Many initial CT findings (Table 5), do not exclude the
use of thrombolytic therapy, but large areas of hypodensity or early signs of
cerebral edema or mass effect likely suggest irreversible neuronal injury that
carries a greater chance of hemorrhagic complications with the use of
thrombolytic agent.
Performance of the CT scan or its interpretation should not delay notifi-
cation of the local stroke team or the neurologist. This is especially true if
protocol design dictates the use of thrombolytic agent only by the stroke
team or the neurologist. To preserve valuable minutes, consultation occursat the moment acute ischemic stroke is suspected.
Ancillary testing
The diagnostic investigation of the stroke patient includes a measurement
of serum glucose and pulse oximetry, complete blood count, electrolyte pan-
el and renal function, coagulation testing, EKG, cardiac enzymes, and chest
radiograph [17]. These ancillary studies aid in evaluating the coexisting con-
ditions and in working quickly through the differential diagnosis of stroke
mimics (Table 6). A complete blood count screens for thrombocytopenia
(important in thrombolytic consideration) and for polycythemia-induced
hyperviscosity. Electrolyte and renal panels may identify unusual causes
Table 5
Early CT findings in ischemic stroke and treatment considerations
Subtle findings Does not exclude thrombolytic therapy
Loss of insular ribbon
Loss of gray-white interface
Loss of sulci
Dense middle cerebral artery sign Suggests large stroke, consider IAa
Hypodensity\1/3 MCA distribution Consider thrombolytics, but
increased risk of hemorrhage
Hypodensity[1/3 MCA distribution Likely contraindication to thrombolytics
Edema/mass effect/midline shift Likely contraindication to thrombolytics
a IA, intra-arterial thrombolysis.
615R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
8/22
of neurologic impairment such as hyponatremia and uremia. Coagulation
studies are vital in patients taking warfarin (INR must be known before
thrombolytic therapy). EKG and cardiac enzymes help identify concurrent
myocardial ischemia and underlying arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation.
Differential diagnosis (see chapter 3)
The most common and perhaps most easily identified stroke masquerader
is hypoglycemia. The routine use of an immediate serum glucose measure-
ment in patients exhibiting alterations in their baseline neurologic statusquickly differentiates hypoglycemic patients from those with acute stroke
and prevents undesirable delays in the treatment of hypoglycemia. Hypoxia
is identified and treated promptly. Eliciting a history of seizure activity at
the onset of stroke symptoms from bystanders or EMS suggests the possi-
bility of Todds (postictal) Paralysis, which may be clinically indistinguishable
from acute stroke. Finally, complicated migraine headaches may be partic-
ularly difficult to clinically differentiate from acute stroke. Patient history,
demographics, and advanced neuroimaging techniques are sometimes help-
ful in making this distinction [7].
General management
The major focus in the initial management of acute ischemic stroke
revolves around well orchestrated coordination of patient care to ensure
Table 6
Abbreviated differential diagnosis of stroke [2,7]
Diagnosis Differential aidsHypoglycemia Finger stick serum glucose
Hyperglycemia
Complicated migraine History, young age, female gender, peripartum
Todds (postictal) paralysis History of seizure activity at stroke onset
Intracerebral hemorrhage CT scan, severe headache, moribund patient
Hypertensive encephalopathy Severe uncontrolled hypertension
Trauma Physical examination history, CT scan
Neoplasm/epidural or subdural hematoma CT scan
Encephalitis/meningitis Fever, nuchal rigidity, photophobia, CSFa
studies
Hyponatremia/uremia Electrolytes/renal panel
Toxicological History, toxicology screen
Psychiatric History, physical examination, psychiatric
meds
Bells palsy History, physical (peripheral 7th CN findings)
Arterial dissection syndromes History, physical examination, imaging studies
(CXR)
a CSF, cerebrospinal fluid.
616 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
9/22
that physician evaluation and diagnostic testing are performed quickly.
Stroke evaluation time targets for potential thrombolytic candidates are
listed in Table 7.The ABCs are addressed first. Fortunately, the vast majority of acute
ischemic stroke patients have no major difficulties with maintaining their
airway, breathing efforts, or circulatory competence early in their clinical
course [2,6]. Problems may arise with large brainstem strokes or with very
large cortical infarcts producing vasogenic edema and mass effect, though
this complication usually does not develop until the second or third day.
Continuous cardiac monitoring of all acute stroke patients is now stan-
dard practice as arrhythmias are common. The administration of hypotonic
fluids such as D5W or excessive fluids in general is avoided to prevent theexacerbation of stroke-related brain edema [9].
Oxygen
Although in practice stroke patients are frequently placed on supplemen-
tal oxygen, there is no evidence to support the routine use of oxygen in the
absence of hypoxia [9]. Because no benefit has been established and some
evidence suggests that supernormal oxygenation might worsen outcome,
supplemental oxygen is reserved only for hypoxic patients [2].
NPO status
A major contributor to the morbidity and mortality of patients afflicted
with ischemic stroke is aspiration pneumonia as the ability to safely swallow
may be compromised. A formal swallowing evaluation is considered before
any oral intake is permitted.
Hyperthermia
Hyperthermia is controlled in all ischemic stroke patients, as an elevated
core temperature is known to be harmful in the setting of stroke. Con-
versely, some experimental studies have demonstrated a decrease in infarct
size with a lowered body temperature [9]. Possible infectious etiologies of
fever in the stroke patient should be considered and investigated as needed.
Table 7
NINDS recommended stroke evaluation targets for potential thrombolytic candidates [6,44]
Time interval Time target
Door to doctor 10 minutes
Access to neurologic expertise 15 minutes
Door to CT completion 25 minutes
Door to CT interpretation 45 minutes
Door to treatment 60 minutes
Admission to monitored bed 3 hours
617R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
10/22
Glucose control
The finding of hypoglycemia on initial evaluation requires immediate
treatment, particularly because hypoglycemia may perfectly mimic acute
stroke. Hyperglycemia is also known to imitate stroke symptoms. Some
studies suggest that elevated serum glucose may worsen stroke outcome
by aggravating neuronal ischemia [2,9]. A serum glucose of greater than
300 mg/dL in the setting of acute ischemic stroke is treated with insulin [2].
Hypertension
There are some controversies surrounding the management of hyperten-sion in the setting of ongoing acute ischemic stroke. Many stroke victims
share hypertension as an underlying risk factor, and during an acute ische-
mic stroke these patients may exhibit even higher blood pressures than base-
line hypertension. There are no data supporting routine aggressive blood
pressure control in the setting of ischemic stroke for those patients who are
not candidates for thrombolytic therapy. Most experts maintain that signifi-
cant lowering of mean arterial pressure acutely may even be harmful. The
delicacy of poorly perfused penumbral tissue is well known. Acutely lower-
ing the blood pressure risks decreasing collateral penumbral perfusion evenfurther, leading to an exacerbation of ongoing ischemia and acceleration
and extension of neuronal death. Most of these patients have limited ability
for autoregulation of cerebral perfusion pressures as a result of chronic
hypertension. For these reasons, blood pressure management is undertaken
carefully.
Special situations such as concurrent acute myocardial infarction, con-
gestive heart failure, hypertensive encephalopathy, acute renal failure, aortic
dissection, and treatment with thrombolytic therapy call for judicious blood
pressure control during acute ischemic stroke [17]. Easily titratable pharma-cologic agents that lower mean arterial pressure gradually are recommended
(Table 8). Antihypertensive drugs known to precipitously drop the blood pres-
sure are avoided [2,6,9]. Agents such as intravenous labetalol or enalapril
Table 8
Emergent antihypertensive therapy in acute ischemic stroke [6], based on current ACLE
guidelines (nonthrombolytic candidates)
DBP[140 mm Hg Sodium nitroprusside (0.5 ug/kg/min) Reduce by approximately
10%20%
SBP[220 or DBP 121140
or MAP >130 mm Hg
Labetalol 1020 mg IV push over 12 min. May repeat or
double labetalol every 10 min to maximum dose of 150 mg.
Enalapril 1.25 mg IV push may be used as alternative therapy.
SBP\220, DBP 120,
or MAP\130 mm Hg
Antihypertensive therapy indicated only if ongoing AMI, severe
CHF, ARF [17], aortic dissection, or hypertensive
encephalopathy
618 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
11/22
are well tolerated and are easily titrated to the desired effect. Aggressive
blood pressure control is not often warranted in the treatment of acute
ischemic stroke; almost all patients equilibrate their blood pressure on theirown over the first few hours [18]. The management of blood pressure differs
greatly in those patients who are potential candidates for thrombolytic ther-
apy, however, as discussed later.
Aspirin
The role of antiplatelet therapy in acute ischemic stroke is still being
debated. The use of aspirin has been studied for the treatment of acute
stroke, but no significant benefit was found regarding death or dependenceat 14 days or 6 months in the large International Stroke Trial (IST) [19]. A
significant benefit was discovered with aspirin use in the IST regarding the
recurrence rate of ischemic stroke within 14 days (2.8% aspirin group versus
3.9% untreated), however, suggesting that aspirin therapy has a role in the
prevention of recurrent strokes [19]. Based on these and other data, the ini-
tiation of aspirin therapy (50325 mg daily) within 48 hours of stroke onset
to prevent stroke recurrence is now advocated [20]. Although aspirin use is
to be withheld for 24 hours after thrombolytic treatment, the use of aspirin
before administration of a thrombolytic agent is not a contraindication tothrombolytic therapy. The routine use of aspirin in potential thrombolytic
candidates, however, is currently discouraged.
Anticoagulation
One of the most controversial subjects in the treatment of acute ischemic
stroke is the role of heparin and low molecular weight heparin antithrom-
botic therapy. For many years, unfractionated intravenous heparin has been
used in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke despite the lack of solid evi-dence to support any clinical benefit. In the IST, lack of significant improve-
ment in clinical outcome studies along with the potential risks of heparin use
(hemorrhage and drug-induced thrombocytopenia) has called into question
the use of heparin in stroke [21]. The efficacy of low dose and high dose sub-
cutaneous heparin in the management of acute ischemic stroke was studied.
No significant clinical benefit with regard to death or dependency was noted
in either group in the 14-day or 6-month outcome measures. There was an
observed benefit in recurrence of ischemic stroke in the IST, but this was off-
set by a similar magnitude of increased hemorrhagic strokes and fatalextracranial bleeds [19]. The bleeding complications observed with heparin
were also found to be dose-related in the IST. Critics of this study maintain
that the anticoagulant effects were not monitored and that mandatory CT
scans did not take place before randomization [22]. Although this short-
coming in the study may account for some hemorrhagic complications,
it does not change the fact that clinical outcome measures did not improve at
619R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
12/22
6 months in the heparin treated patients. There is no strong evidence to
support the use of unfractionated heparin in cardioembolic strokes [2022].
Many recent clinical trials have assessed the efficacy of low molecularweight heparins (LMWHs) in acute ischemic stroke. A study by Kay et al
examining nadroparin (Fraxaparine) for acute stroke treatment demon-
strated a significant positive dose-dependent effect at 6 months in the treat-
ment groups [23]. Unfortunately, a larger multicenter trial of Fraxaparine
with a similar study design (the Fraxiparine in Ischemic Stroke Study) failed
to reproduce these results [24]. The Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke
Treatment (TOAST) tested the efficacy of the LMWH danaparoid (ORG
10172). The treatment group did show an increase in favorable outcomes
at 7 days, but this benefit did not extend out to 3 months. Despite failureto show a significant improvement in clinical outcome for stroke, many
studies have shown a clear benefit associated with the use of LMWH in
stroke patients for DVT and PE prophylaxis.
There are no definitive data to confirm a significant improvement in
clinical outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with either
unfractionated heparin or LMWHs. No recommendation can be made at
the present time to support the use of unfractionated heparin or LMWHs
in the setting of acute ischemic stroke except for the prophylaxis of
DVT and PE. Many clinicians continue to use these medications for thetheoretical benefit of anticoagulation in patients with cardioembolic
stroke and thromboembolism. Results of ongoing research trials are
eagerly awaited.
Intravenous thrombolytic therapy
Background and literature review of thrombolytic therapy
In 1995, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
(NINDS) rt-PA Stroke Study Group published the landmark study of
thrombolytic therapy for acute ischemic stroke. FDA approval of a single
pharmacotherapy for acute stroke followed. Using rt-PA (alteplase) within
a strict set of guidelines and treatment parameters, the NINDS trial demon-
strated a significant benefit in clinical outcome at 3 months for acute ische-
mic stroke patients. The NINDS trial consisted of two major parts. Part 1
enrolled 291 patients and assessed the clinical efficacy of rt-PA as indicated
by a four-point improvement in the NIH Stroke Scale over established base-line or a complete resolution of neurologic deficit at 24 hours. This part of
the NINDS trial demonstrated no significant difference between treatment
and placebo groups at 24 hours. Statistically significant improvement in
clinical outcome, however, was seen in the treatment group at 3 months
in four independent stroke outcome measures (NIHSS, modified Rankin
scale, Barthel index, and Glasgow outcome scale). Part 2 of the NINDS trial
620 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
13/22
enrolled 333 patients and used a global test statistic to ascertain clinical out-
come at 3 months using the same four clinical assessment scales. The long-
term 3-month clinical benefit of rt-PA noted in Part 1 of the NINDS trialwas confirmed in Part 2 [25]. Clinical benefit is sustained at 1 year for
patients treated with rt-PA, with a 30% greater likelihood of minimal or
no disability at 12 months than the placebo group [26].
In the NINDS trial, the incidence of the most feared side effect of throm-
bolytic therapy, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) occurred ten-
fold in the treatment group versus placebo (6.4% versus 0.6%). Despite these
complications, there was no significant difference in mortality at 3 months
between the treatment and placebo groups (17% versus 21%, respectively)
and no increase in the severely disabled group was observed [25]. Overall theNINDS trial showed that patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with
rt-PA following a strict established protocol were 30% more likely to have
minimal or no neurologic deficit at 3 months than the placebo group while
suffering no increase in overall mortality.
One of the hurdles to the widespread use of rt-PA for acute ischemic
stroke patients is that many other trials have not reflected similar benefits,
whereas some have shown an alarming rate of ICH in the treatment groups.
Three other major trials of intravenous rt-PA (the European Cooperative
Acute Stroke Study [ECASS I] [27], ECASS II [28], and the AlteplaseThrombolysis for Acute Noninterventional Therapy in Ischemic Stroke
[ATLANTIS] trial [29]) failed to demonstrate a statistically significant
improvement in clinical outcome at 3 months in rt-PA treated patients versus
placebo [17]. In a recent publication Katzan et al reported that 15.7% of rt-
PA treated ischemic stroke patients among 29 Cleveland area hospitals devel-
oped symptomatic ICHs [30]. Many clinicians continue to believe that the
evidence presented in these negative trials may offset the positive results of
the NINDS trial. None of these trials, however, maintained the strict guide-
lines put forth by the NINDS investigators. ECASS I, ECASS II, and theATLANTIS trial all involved patients treated well beyond the 3-hour win-
dow of the NINDS trial, with only a combined 14% of patients treated with
rt-PA within 3 hours of stroke symptom onset in these trials compared with
99.7% in the NINDS trial [17]. In addition to the time window, many other
NINDS protocol violations have occurred in comparative trials, including an
astonishing 50% protocol deviation rate in the Cleveland area study [31].
Since 1996, numerous U.S. and Canadian centers have experienced sim-
ilar success with the use of rt-PA following the NINDS protocol. Albers et
al recently reported the results of the phase IV STARS study, which enrolled389 patients and demonstrated a significant improvement in clinical out-
come at 3 months and a low rate (3.3%) of symptomatic ICH [32]. These
positive results were achieved despite a longer median stroke onset to treat-
ment time (2 hours, 44 minutes) and a 32.6% protocol violation rate. Of
these violations, however, only 13.4% consisted of treatment beyond the
3-hour window.
621R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
14/22
There are investigators that argue against thrombolytic treatment because
the exact location of the underlying obstructive vascular lesion is not known,
noting that intravenous rt-PA might not be as effective in large vessel occlu-sions and these patients should not be exposed to the risk for the complica-
tions of thrombolytic therapy [33]. In the NINDS trial patients with all major
subtypes of stroke including those caused by large vessel occlusion benefited
from thrombolytic therapy [17]. The technology to precisely localize arterial
occlusions is restricted by the lack of availability of institutional resources.
This could prevent countless stroke patients from receiving beneficial ther-
apy. Even as the research on the optimal use of rt-PA in acute ischemic stroke
continues, currently intravenous rt-PA administered within the NINDS
guidelines is the best available treatment offering hope for a better outcomefollowing acute stroke [34]. Based on available data, the treatment of acute
ischemic stroke with thrombolytic therapy carries the Grade A recommenda-
tion of the Stroke Council of the American Heart Association provided that
the NINDS inclusion criteria and protocol guidelines are met by qualified
treating physicians in capable treating facilities [35].
Administration of intravenous thrombolytic therapy
Having established the diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke, the ED physician
is now confronted with the critical decision whether to proceed with thrombo-
lytic therapy or pursue supportive care. If less than 3 hours have passed since
the exact time of symptom onset and the patient is at least18 years of age, then
IV thrombolytic treatment must be considered. If available, stroke team mem-
bers or neurologists must be involved in this decision-making process. The
final decision is made only after extensive and informative discussion with the
patient (if possible) and family members has taken place.
The patient and the family members are informed of the potential risksand possible benefits of thrombolytic therapy, and this interaction is docu-
mented. The patient and family are informed of:
1. The fact there is a 30% greater chance of improved clinical outcome at 3
months and 1 year with rt-PA treatment
2. The fact there is a tenfold greater risk for symptomatic ICH within 36
hours in patients treated with the use of thrombolytic therapy
3. The fact there is no significant difference in mortality rate at 3 months
or 1 year despite the increased rate of hemorrhages with rt-PA treat-ment
4. The rationale behind the use of rt-PA for acute ischemic stroke given the
significant morbidity and mortality risk for the underlying stroke and
the use of rt-PA [31]
5. The individual patient risk to benefit profile may neither be clearly de-
fined nor always predicted
622 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
15/22
A subgroup of patients within the accepted NINDS criteria carries a
higher risk for hemorrhage, and a lower chance of benefiting from rt-PA
therapy. Increased risk for hemorrhage is associated with the presence ofsignificant findings on early CT scan, treatment beyond 3 hours of symptom
onset, NIHSS[22, and elevations in post-thrombolytic blood pressure [7].
Factors associated with a worse prognosis regardless of thrombolytic treat-
ment include diabetes mellitus, advanced age, uncontrolled hypertension,
higher NIHSS scores, and early CT findings of edema, hypodensity, or a
dense middle cerebral artery sign [7,32,36]. The presence of any or a combi-
nation of these factors are carefully considered before recommending
thrombolytic therapy.
Blood pressure management in the thrombolytic candidate carries a spe-cial significance, as one of the contraindications to thrombolysis is uncon-
trolled hypertension at the time of treatment. The preintervention blood
pressure is gently lowered to a systolic blood pressure of\185 mm Hg and
a diastolic blood pressure of\110 mm Hg [35]. Recommendations for
thrombolytic candidates adopted from ACLS guidelines are presented in
Table 10. If aggressive measures are required to lower the patients blood
pressure to less than 185/110 in the pretreatment window, the patient is
excluded from thrombolytic therapy.
After all inclusion and exclusion criteria are considered (Table 9) and therisks and benefits of thrombolytic therapy have been weighed and discussed
Table 9
Indications and contraindications to thrombolytic therapy in acute ischemic stroke [25]
Indications
Acute ischemic stroke within 3 hours from symptom onset.
Age greater than 18 years old (rt-PA has not been studied in pediatric stroke)
Contraindications
Evidence of intracranial hemorrhage on pretreatment evaluation
Suspicion of subarachnoid hemorrhage
Recent stroke, intracranial or intraspinal surgery, or serious head trauma in the past 3 months
Major surgery or serious trauma in the previous 14 daysa
Arterial puncture at a noncompressible site or lumbar puncture in the last 7 daysa
Major symptoms that are rapidly improving or only minor stroke symptoms (NIHSS \4)a
History of intracranial hemorrhage
Uncontrolled hypertension at the time of treatment
Seizure at the stroke onset
Active internal bleeding
Intracranial neoplasm, arteriovenous malformation, or aneurysm
Known bleeding diathesis including but not limited to:
Current use of anticoagulants or an International Normalized Ratio (INR)[1.7 or
a prothrombin time (PT)[15 seconds
Administration of heparin within 48 hours preceding the onset of stroke and an elevated
activated partial thromboplastin time at presentation
Platelet count\100,000 mm3
a In the NINDS trial, not present in current package insert.
623R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
16/22
with the patient and family, the treatment decision is made. The recom-
mended dosing of intravenous rt-PA in acute ischemic stroke is the following:
Total dose 0.9 mg/kg (90 mg maximum)
10% of total dose given IVP over 12 minutes
90% remainder as an infusion over 1 hour
rt-PA is packaged in 50-mg and 100-mg vials. After the treatment dosageis established, the excess rt-PA is removed and discarded before drug admin-
istration to prevent overdose.
Intra-arterial thrombolytic treatment (see also chapter 9)
The use of intra-arterial thrombolytic drugs to facilitate clot lysis is
currently under investigation. Using a tiny catheter, skilled interventionalneuroradiologists are able to identify the obstructive lesion. Local infusion
of thrombolytic agents proximal, distal, and into occlusive cerebrovascular
clots follows. Although intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy is limited
to centers possessing the necessary angiographic resources, the initial
trials assessing the efficacy of intra-arterial thrombolysis are promising
[37,38].
The largest randomized trial of intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy to
date is the Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism II (PROACT II)
trial that screened 12,323 patients, sending 474 to arteriography and treating121 with intra-arterial thrombolytics [37]. Intra-arterial prourokinase was
used in patients with angiographic evidence of middle cerebral artery occlu-
sion or a first-order MCA branch. Intravenous heparin was used concomi-
tantly with the intra-arterial drug, and therapy was begun within 6 hours of
stroke symptom onset. At the 2-hour assessment, the prourokinase group
showed a 67% rate of partial or complete lysis of clot compared with
Table 10
Emergent antihypertensive therapy in acute ischemic stroke [6] (thrombolytic candidates)
Pretreatment Labetalol 1020 mg IVP, 12 doses orSBP[185 mm Hg or Nitro paste 12 or
DBP[110 mm Hg Enalapril 1.25 mg IVPb
Post-treatmenta
DBP[140 mm Hg Sodium nitroprusside (0.5 ug/kg/min)
SBP[230 mm Hg or
DBP 121140 mm Hg
Labetalol 1020 mg IVP and consider a Labetalol drip at 12
mg/min
SBP 180230 mm Hg or
DBP 105120 mm Hg
Labetalol 10 mg IVP, may repeat and double up to a maximum
dose of 150 mg
a Monitor vitals every 15 min for 2 hours, then every 30 min for 6 hours, then every hour for
16 hours.b Not in the current AHA Guidelines.
624 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
17/22
18% of the heparin-only group [37]. On outcome measures, the treatment
group enjoyed a 40% rate of favorable outcome defined as the ability to
live independently at 3 months as opposed to 25% in the heparin-onlygroup. A significant fivefold increase in ICH was noted in the treatment
group also.
Assessment of the efficacy and safety of intra-arterial rt-PA in acute stroke
treatment is now being conducted in several trials. The observed benefit of
thrombolytic therapy noted within a 6-hour treatment window potentially
increases the pool of stroke patients eligible for thrombolytic treatment. The
intra-arterial treatments are found to be effective in large artery obstructions.
This is encouraging, as intravenous thrombolytic therapy is known to have
a lower recanalization rate in larger arterial occlusions [3].Another intriguing possibility is the use of intravenous rt-PA followed by
intra-arterial treatment. In this scenario, ED physicians and stroke special-
ists begin intravenous thrombolytic therapy while awaiting the assembly
of an interventional neuroradiology team. This practice introduces the op-
portunity for the initiation of intravenous therapy at outlying hospitals
followed by transport to stroke centers with intra-arterial treatment capabil-
ities [39]. Although limited by small sample sizes, two recent publications
reported positive outcomes of combined therapy. In the EMS Bridging
Trial, 35 patients were randomized to receive either placebo or 0.6 mg/kgof intravenous rt-PA within 3 hours of symptom onset. Cerebral angiography
was then performed, and if an arterial occlusion was identified, the patient
received IA-tPA. Improved recanalization rates and improved 3-month out-
comes were observed in the combined IV-IA tPA therapy group [38]. A retro-
spective analysis by Ernst et al looked at 20 consecutive patients treated with
combined IV and IA rt-PA within 3 hours of symptom onset. The initial
dose of intravenous rt-PA was 0.6 mg/kg (60 mg maximum dose) with a
15% bolus followed by a 30-minute infusion. All 20 patients received angiog-
raphy, and 16 of these were treated with intra-arterial rt-PA (up to 0.3 mg/kg). Again, favorable outcomes were observed as 50% of enrolled patients
recovered to a 2-month modified Rankin scale of 02 (minimal or no disabil-
ity) [40]. The median NIHSS was 21 in the study population compared with
a median NIHSS score of 14 in the NINDS trial, suggesting that the com-
bined approach of intravenous and intra-arterial therapy may play a signifi-
cant role in improving outcomes in more severe strokes involving larger and
more proximal arterial occlusions. Both studies reported excellent door to
treatment times, likely contributing to the positive results of these analyses
and further illustrating the importance of time in treating acute ischemicstroke.
Intra-arterial thrombolytic treatment has indeed shown early promise in
clinical practice. At the present time, this potentially valuable therapy is lim-
ited to major stroke treatment centers, but as research is advanced and more
interventional neuroradiologists are trained, intra-arterial thrombolysis is
likely to become a significant part of acute stroke treatment.
625R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
18/22
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
19/22
prioritization, and management. At the hospital level, emergency physicians
and neurologists must strive together to establish and practice well-
constructed stroke protocols and treatment guidelines. The implementationof stroke code teams enlisting the departments of Emergency Medicine,
Neurology, Radiology, skilled nursing staff, and hospital administration is
imperative to streamline acute stroke patients into optimal care scenarios.
These multidisciplinary teams serve as leaders in the advancement of stroke
care within their local healthcare systems and communities. Through the
creation of well-organized stroke code systems encompassing the prehospi-
tal, ED, and inpatient arenas, stroke teams provide the framework for rapid
and effective acute stroke care.
A vigorous involvement of emergency physicians is critical in the successof stroke treatment. Emergency physicians must become experts in the diag-
nosis and management of acute ischemic stroke and play a leadership role in
advancing the use of thrombolytic therapy. In recognizing and embracing
their critical function at the forefront, emergency physicians will entrench
themselves in the exciting and evolving world of the interventional care of
acute ischemic stroke for years to come.
References
[1] American Heart Association. 2001 Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. Dallas, Texas:
American Heart Association; 2000.
[2] Jauch EC, Kissela B, McNeil P. Acute stroke management from neurology/neuro-vascular
diseases. Sited from eMedicine.com, Inc., eMedicine Journal 2001 emedicine.com. Accessed
March 5, 2001.
[3] Kothari R, Pancioli A, Brott T, Broderick J. Thrombolytic therapy for cerebral infarction.
Acad Emerg Med 1996;3:88192.
[4] Hakim AM. Ischemic penumbra: the therapeutic window. Neurology 1998;51(Suppl):
S446.
[5] Zivin JA. Factors determining the therapeutic window for stroke. Neurology 1998;50:599603.
[6] American Heart Association. Textbook of advanced cardiac life support Dallas, TX:
American Heart Association, 1997.
[7] Jauch E. Ischemic anterior circulation stroke. From the Foundation for Education and
Research in Neurological Emergencies Presentation at the SAEM Conference. Atlanta,
GA, 2001.
[8] Kothari R, Pancioli A, Liu T. Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale: reproducibility and
validity. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33:3738.
[9] Adams HP, Brott TG, Crowell RM, et al. Guidelines for the management of patients with
acute ischemic stroke: a statement for healthcare professionals from a special writing group
of the Stroke Council, American Heart Association. Stroke 1994;25:190114.[10] Kanter D, Kothari R, Pancioli A, et al. The Greater Cincinnati T-PA Experience After the
NINDS Trial: does a longer time to treatment within the current three-hour window reduce
efficacy? [abstract] Stroke 1999;30:244.
[11] Pancioli AM, Broderick J, Kothari R, et al. Public perception of stroke warning signs and
knowledge of potential risk factors. JAMA 1998;279(16):128892.
[12] Johnston SC, Gress DR, Browner WS. Short-term prognosis after emergency department
diagnosis of transient ischemic attack. JAMA 2000;284(22):290106.
627R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
20/22
[13] Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM, editors. Principles of neural science. Third edition.
New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc; 1991. p. 7249.
[14] Adams HP, Davis PH, Leira EC, et al. Baseline NIH Stroke Scale strongly predicts
outcome after stroke: a report of the Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment
(TOAST). Neurology 1999;53:12631.
[15] Culebras A, Kase CS, Masdeu JC, et al. Practice guidelines for the use of imaging in
transient ischemic attacks and acute stroke: a report of the Stroke Council, American Heart
Association. Stroke 1997;28:148097.
[16] Schriger DL, Kalafut M, Starkman S, et al. Cranial computed tomography interpretation
in acute stroke: physician accuracy in determining eligibility for thrombolytic therapy.
JAMA 1998;279:12937.
[17] Brott T, Bogousslavsky J. Treatment of acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2000;343:71022.
[18] Broderick J, Brott T, Barsan W, et al. Blood pressure during the first minutes of focal
cerebral ischemia. Ann Emerg Med 1993;22:143843.
[19] International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group. The International Stroke Trial (IST): a
randomized trial of aspirin, subcutaneous heparin, both, or neither among 19,435 patients
with acute ischemic stroke. Lancet 1997;349:156981.
[20] Albers GW, Amarenco P, Easton JD, Sacco RL, Teal P. Antithrombotic and thrombolytic
therapy for ischemic stroke. Chest 2001;119(Suppl):S30020.
[21] Sandercock P. Is there still a role for intravenous heparin in acute stroke? No. Arch Neurol
1999;56:11601.
[22] Grau AJ, Hacke W. Is there still a role for intravenous heparin in acute stroke? Yes. Arch
Neurol 1999;56:115960.
[23] Kay R, Wong KS, Lu YL, et al. Low-molecular-weight-heparin for the treatment of acute
ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1995;333:158893.[24] Hommel M, for the FISS bis Investigators Group. Fraxiparin in Ischemic Stroke Study
(FISS bis). Cerebrovasc Dis 1998;8(Suppl 4):S19.
[25] The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group.
Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1995;333:15817.
[26] Kwiatkowski TG, Libman RB, Frankel M, et al. Effects of tissue plasminogen activator for
acute ischemic stroke at one year. N Engl J Med 1999;340:17817.
[27] Hacke W, Kaste M, Fiechi C, et al. Intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue
plasminogen activator for acute hemispheric stroke. JAMA 1995;274:101725.
[28] Hacke W, Kaste M, Fieschi C, et al. Randomised Double-blind Placebo-controlled Trial of
Thrombolytic Therapy with Intravenous Alteplase in Acute Ischaemic Stroke (ECASS II).
Lancet 1998;352:124551.[29] Clark WM, Wissman S, Albers GW, et al. Recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator
(alteplase) for ischemic stroke 3 to 5 hours after symptom onset. The ATLANTIS Study: a
randomized controlled trial. Alteplase thrombolysis for acute noninterventional therapy in
ischemic stroke. JAMA 1999;282:201926.
[30] Katzan IL, Furlan AJ, Lloyd LE, et al. Use of tissue-type plasminogen activator for acute
ischemic stroke: the Cleveland area experience. JAMA 2000;283:11518.
[31] Sloan EP. Clinical use of tPA in acute ischemic stroke. From the Foundation for Education
and Research in Neurological Emergencies Presentation at the SAEM Conference. Atlanta,
GA, 2001.
[32] Albers GW, Bates VE, Clark WM, et al. Intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator
for treatment of acute stroke: the Standard Treatment with Alteplase to Reverse Stroke(STARS) Study. JAMA 2000;283:114550.
[33] Caplan LR, Mohr JP, Kistler JP, Koroshetz W. Should thrombolytic therapy be the first-
line treatment for acute ischemic stroke? Thrombolysisnot a panacea for ischemic stroke.
N Engl J Med 1997;337:130910.
[34] Grotta J. Should thrombolytic therapy be the first-line treatment for acute ischemic stroke?
t-PA- the best current option for most patients. N Engl J Med 1997;337:13103.
628 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
21/22
[35] Adams HP, Brott T, Furlan AJ, et al. Guidelines for thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke:
a supplement to the guidelines for the management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a
statement for health care professionals from a special writing group of the Stroke Council,
American Heart Association. Circulation 1996;94:116774.
[36] Chiu D, Krieger K, Villar-Cordova C, et al. Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator for
acute ischemic stroke: feasibility, safety, and efficacy in the first year of clinical practice.
Stroke 1998;29:1822.
[37] Furlan A, Higashida R, Wechsler L, et al. Intra-arterial prourokinase for acute ischemic
stroke: the PROACT II Study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1999;282:200311.
[38] Lewandowski C, Frankel M, Tomsick T, et al. Combined intravenous and intra-arterial
r-tpa versus intra-arterial therapy of acute ischemic stroke: Emergency Management of
Stroke (EMS) Bridging Trial. Stroke 1999;30:2598605.
[39] Pancioli A, Kothari R. Thrombolytic therapy for acute ischemic stroke. Air Med J
1999;18(2):5661.
[40] Ernst R, Pancioli A, Tomsick T, et al. Combined intravenous and intra-arterial re-
combinant tissue plasminogen activator in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2000;31:25527.
[41] Ronning OM, Guldvog B. Stroke units versus general medical wards, I: twelve- and
eighteen-month survival. A randomized controlled trial. Stroke 1998;29:5862.
[42] Barsan WG, Brott TG, Broderick JP, et al. Time of hospital presentation in patients with
acute stroke. Arch Intern Med 1993;153:255861.
[43] Kothari R, Jauch E, Broderick J, et al. Acute stroke: delays to presentation and emergency
department evaluation. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33:38.
[44] The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Proceedings of the National
Symposium on Rapid Identification and Treatment of Acute Stroke. NIH Publication No.
974239. Marler JR, Winter-Jones P, Emr M, editors. Bethesda, MD: National Institutesof Health; 1997. p. 1578.
[45] Gresham GE, Alexander D, Bishop DS, et al. American Heart Association Prevention
Conference. IV. Prevention and rehabilitation of stroke: rehabilitation. Stroke 1997;
28:15226.
Appendix A: The NIH Stroke Scale
Category Description Score
1a Level of consciousness Alert 0
Drowsy 1
Stuporous 2
Coma 3
1b LOC questions (Month, age) Answers both correctly
Answers one correctly
Incorrect on both
0
1
2
1c LOC commands (Open, close
eyes, show thumb)
Obeys both correctly
Obeys one correctly
Incorrect on both
0
1
2
2 Best gaze (Follow finger) Normal 0Partial gaze palsy 1
Forced deviation 2
3 Best visual (Visual fields) No visual loss 0
Partial hemianopia 1
Complete hemianopia 2
Bilateral hemianopia 3
(continued on next page)
629R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630
-
8/7/2019 EVC isqumico
22/22
Appendix A (continued)
Category Description Score
4 Facial palsy (Show teeth, raisebrows, squeeze eyes shut)
NormalMinor
Partial
Complete
01
2
3
5 Motor arm lefta Raise 90, hold
10 seconds)
No drift 0
Drift 1
Cant resist gravity 2
No effort against gravity 3
No movement 4
6 Motor arm righta (Raise 90,
hold 10 seconds)
No drift 0
Drift 1
Cant resist gravity 2
No effort against gravity 3
No movement 4
7 Motor leg lefta (Raise 30, hold
5 seconds)
No drift 0
Drift 1
Cant resist gravity 2
No effort against gravity 3
No movement 4
8 Motor leg righta (Raise 30,
hold 5 seconds)
No drift 0
Drift 1
Cant resist gravity 2
No effort against gravity 3
No movement 4
9 Limb ataxia Absent 0
Present in one limb 1
Present in two limbs 2
10 Sensory (Fine touch to face,
arm, leg)
Normal 0
Partial loss 1
Severe loss 2
11 Extinction/neglect (Double
simultaneous testing)
No neglect 0
Partial neglect 1
Complete neglect 212 Dysarthria (Speech clarity to
mama, baseball, huckleberry,
tip-top, fifty-fifty)
Normal articulation 0
Mild to moderate dysarthria 1
Near to unintelligible or worse 2
13 Best languageb (Name items,
describe pictures)
No aphasia 0
Mild to moderate aphasia 1
Severe aphasia 2
Mute 3
Total 042
a For limbs with amputation, joint fusion, etc, score a 9 and explain.b
For intubation or other physical barrier to speech, score a 9 and explain.
630 R.J. Thurman, E.C. Jauch / Emerg Med Clin N Am 20 (2002) 609630