![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abstract
Aims Stroke thrombolysis with
alteplase is the most effective therapy for acute ischaemic stroke. Most trial
data comes from tertiary centres. This study set out to assess safety and
efficacy of thrombolysis at a secondary provincial centre in New Zealand.
Methods A retrospective 3-year audit
was performed to assess efficacy and safety of altepase at a secondary
provincial hospital in New Zealand.
Results Out of 27 patients receiving
treatment 17 (62.3%) improved and 10 (37.0%) enjoyed essentially complete
symptom resolution (mRS=0 or 1). There was one symptomatic intracranial
haemorrhage (3.7%).
Conclusion Administration of
intravenous alteplase for ischaemic stroke patients is effective and safe in the
secondary provincial setting if local protocols are used, patient selection is
stringent, and care is supervised by neurologists with training/experience in
stroke care and thrombolysis. Aspects of thrombolysis-related management issues
in this study population are discussed.
Thrombolysis with alteplase is the most effective medical
therapy for acute ischaemic stroke. Its application has been increasingly
permeating medical practice around the globe ever since the publication of the
NINDS trial data in 1995 establishing safety and efficacy if the medication is
administered within 3 hours of symptom onset adhering to strict in- and
exclusion criteria.1
Subsequent trials and meta-analyses have confirmed the
utility of this medication in the tertiary setting under expert
guidance.2,3 In 2008, the window was extended
from 3 to 4.5 hours after publication of ECASS III using slightly more stringent
criteria4.
Most international data come from tertiary centres
equipped with stroke units and 24 hour/7days a week (24/7) on-call stroke
neurologists casting some doubts on the transferability of this data to
community hospitals and countries such as New Zealand where even tertiary
centers struggle to provide an on-call roster of stroke neurologists.
Fink et al published their Christchurch audit data in
2009 indicating that this therapy can be administered safely and efficaciously
within New Zealand with general neurology
oversight.5
A similar paper comes from
Australia.6 However, these studies once more
come from tertiary centres that enjoy a sufficient number of neurologists/stroke
physicians on staff to provide such a service.
A recent population-based study from South Australia once
confirmed that the vast majority of stroke thrombolysis occurs in the tertiary
setting and that distance to a tertiary hospital inversely correlates with
access to thrombolysis.7 A few smaller studies
report thrombolysis use at community
hospitals8–10 and associated ethical
dilemmas are discussed.9,11,12
Other papers addressing thrombolysis at non-tertiary or
rural/provincial centers focus primarily on telemedicine utilising two way
videoconferencing systems to provide tertiary centre
back-up9,13,14 rather than the provision of
on-site expert support. In New Zealand, stroke thrombolysis is offered at a
number of non-tertiary, provincial, and/or rural centres (data unpublished,
Ranta, 2011) although data to support this practice in New Zealand is lacking.
Since March 2008 stroke thrombolysis has been offered at
Palmerston North Hospital, a 350-bed secondary teaching hospital located on New
Zealand’s North Island serving a population of 167,000. The acute stroke
service, established in July 2007, operates a 5-bed stroke unit and comprises a
multi-disciplinary team lead by two full-time neurologists providing routine
Monday through Friday 8am to 5pm coverage and an informal after hour (24 hours,
7 days per week) thrombolysis roster on a goodwill basis (i.e. without
remuneration) with only rare occasions of no coverage being provided. All
thrombolysis cases are attended in person and directly supervised by either one
of the two staff neurologists both during regular and after hours.
This paper presents a complete retrospective audit
spanning three years from mid-March 2008 through mid-March 2011 capturing all
stroke patients thrombolysed at Palmerston North Hospital starting from the
local introduction of this therapy through completion of this audit. This audit
was intended to assess safety and efficacy of stroke thrombolysis at a secondary
centre in New Zealand.
Methods
Since initiation of stroke thrombolysis at
Palmerston North Hospital in March 2008 all patients receiving or being
considered for stroke thrombolysis have been entered into a registry for later
audit purposes.
Registered patient files were reviewed
retrospectively to extract the following: time of symptom onset, ambulance times
(dispatch, arrival at the scene, departure of scene, and arrival at the
hospital), triage category in ambulance and emergency department (ED), time of
computed tomography (CT), time of laboratory value availability, time of
neurologist notification/arrival in the emergency department, any reason if
treatment was deferred, protocol violations, needle time, complications
including haemorrhage on CT, neurological deterioration, death of any cause,
modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at time of neurologic assessment, at 24 hours,
at discharge, and at outpatient follow-up 6–12 weeks after discharge if
available.
Generally, mRS was determined by two independent
investigators, neither of whom was involved in the care of the patients. In
cases where there was a discrepancy between reviewers the primary investigator
was consulted to make a final assessment. Data was collated and analysed using
Microsoft Excel. As there was no comparison group and overall numbers were small
statistical significance was not assessed.
Results
Between March 2008 and 13 April 2011, Alteplase was
considered in 58 patients, 27 of whom received the treatment (45.6%). The total
number of ischaemic strokes admitted to Palmerston North Hospital over the same
period was 552 indicating a low thrombolysis rate of only 4.9%. However, case
frequency has progressively increased over time (Figure 1) and the thrombolysis
rate rose to 7.3% during the final 12 months of this audit (16 thrombolysed; 220
total ischaemic strokes). Eleven patients (40.7%) were treated outside of
regular hours and one of these was treated after midnight.
Figure 1. Number of patients treated per
quarter and proportion out of hours
![]() Average ± standard deviation (SD) onset to needle
time was 170 ± 40 minutes, with a significant proportion spent after
completion of CT (average of 52 ± 30.1 minutes) in comparison to a
relatively short time span from door to CT (48 ± 32.2 minutes).
The average time of the ambulance crew spent on the scene
was 21 ± 6.4 minutes. Priority scores during the ambulance and ED phase
ranged from 1–3 with 65% (in ambulance) and 57% (in ED) receiving a
priority of ≤2 (i.e. high acuity transported with sirens activated).
Patients with a lower acuity score experienced on average
a non-significantly longer time on location (1.8 minutes), but an average
12-minute longer door to needle time in ED. Ambulance transport times could not
adequately be compared as patient distance from location to hospital varies
widely given the size of the district.
Patient demographics, time delays, and a comparison to
tertiary hospital data are summarised in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1. Patient demographics and presenting
times and location
*Except when specified e.g ‘(years)’; **
Regular hours = Monday through Friday 8am–5pm; After hours = Saturday,
Sunday, and Monday–Friday 5:01pm–7:69am.
Table 2. Time delays in
minutes
*These figures exclude three patients in whom CT
time was not documented; coincidentally these three individuals received tPA
faster than the total average, which explains why average ‘CT to
needle’ and ‘Door to CT’ figures do not exactly add up to
total average door to needle time.
Overall, 17 (62.3%) patients improved after receiving
alteplase, 10 (37%) of whom had a very favourable outcome (mRS = 0–1), six
(22.2%) patients remained unchanged, and four (14.8%) patients worsened. The
symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) rate was 3.7% (Table 3).
The average degree of improvement observed in responders
was 2.41 ± 1.33 points on the mRS. Overall change in mRS including the
patients who worsened, died (including non-alteplase related deaths), or did not
respond still showed an average net improvement of 1.26 ± 1.95 points
(Table 4 and Figure 2).
Table 3. Patient outcomes
* In the Christchurch study improvement was reported
as a drop in NIHSS of 4 or more points (NIHSS ranges 0–41) and very
favourable outcome as mRS of 0–2.
** Wellington Hospital for CEA (1); Whangarei
Hospital (1); both were subsequently discharged home.
mRS= modified Rankin Scale; ICH=intracerebral
haemorrhage; rtPA=recombinant tissue Plasminogen Activator.
Table 4: mRS scores in thrombolysed
patients
* d/c=discharge; f/u=follow-up when available and
within 3 months of rtPA.
Six patients were thrombolysed within the extended
3–4.5 hour window. One of these died of a subsequent myocardial
infarction, one patient did not improve, and four improved by an average mRS of
3.25 ± 2.06.
All four patients who worsened died. Three of these
deaths were unrelated to Alteplase use. Two patients died from ischaemic stroke
complications (i.e. aspiration pneumonia) without change in neurologic function
after receiving Alteplase and follow-up head CTs did not show any evidence of
bleeding. The third patient’s infusion was prematurely stopped after just
a third of the dose had been administered because the nurse thought she had made
an error in administering the drug. Shortly after stopping the infusion the
patient suffered a cardiac arrest. Autopsy demonstrated no evidence of an
alteplase-related complication (including no evidence of ICH) and root cause
analysis revealed that no medication administration error had taken place. The
cause of death was determined to be a myocardial infarction.
Figure 2. mRS before and after
treatment
![]() *0=No symptoms; 1=Mild symptoms, full ADL; 2=Mild
symptoms, some decrease in ADL, but fully independent; 3=Moderate symptoms,
requires some help with ADL, but ambulatory; 4=moderately severe disability,
non-ambulatory, unable to attend to own bodily needs; 5=severe disability,
requires constant nursing care; 6=dead.
The one patient who suffered a symptomatic ICH had a
severe ischaemic stroke on presentation with National Institute of Health Stroke
Scale (NIHSS) of 27; given the severity of the stroke bleeding risk was
considered relatively high, but after consultation with patient’s family
it was deemed in the patient’s best interest to provide the treatment, the
patient was within the 3 hour window and all NINDS inclusion criteria were met.
One other patient showed evidence of a significant
haemorrhage on post-thrombolysis CT, but this did not lead to clinical worsening
and is thus not classed as a “symptomatic”
ICH.1,4 This patient also met all
inclusion/exclusion criteria although the patient had a borderline platelet
count of 99,000/ml3, which rose to
102,000/ml3 on rapid re-check prior to giving
alteplase (cut off is 100,000/ml3).
Two further patients demonstrated mild
“streaking” on CT suggesting a very minor haemorrhage. Both patients
were asymptomatic from these minor haemorrhages and experienced significant and
rapid recovery from their presenting stroke symptoms. Aside from the debatable
deviation from inclusion criteria in the above patient with a borderline
platelet count there were no identified violations of the local thrombolysis
protocol, which is largely based on the NINDS criteria.
Reasons for deferring thrombolysis in the 31 patients who
were referred for thrombolysis but not treated included ICH on CT, rapidly
improving or resolved symptoms, current warfarin therapy/elevated INR,
persistently elevated blood pressure, increased systemic bleeding risk (e.g.
recent bleeding ulcer), and presentation inconsistent with stroke.
The majority of the remaining 492 ischaemic stroke
patients admitted to Palmerston North Hospital during the study period were not
‘considered’ for tPA because they arrived outside the treatment
window. However, some patients also missed out because of inefficiencies and
unawareness of thrombolysis availability by emergency room staff. This was
predominantly a problem shortly after introduction of stroke thrombolysis at our
centre and since these rates started to be monitored 12 months ago we are aware
of only a single patient who missed out due to a poor triage process. This
patient was a cancer patient and was initially referred to the oncologists
instead of the thrombolysis team and by the time neurology was notified too much
time had elapsed.
Discussion
This is a retrospective audit and is thus limited by its
observational, non-randomised, and open label design. Observer bias was limited
by recruiting independent chart auditors and adhering to international
definitions for determining mRS and classifications such as “symptomatic
haemorrhage.”
Keeping the limitations of a retrospective audit and
small sample size in mind this study is reassuring as regards safety of stroke
thrombolysis with intravenous Alteplase in the secondary setting in New Zealand
given that our results closely mimic both tertiary data from a New Zealand
centre as well as data from a large international meta-analysis.
Efficacy is more difficult to evaluate from an unblinded
series with no control group. However, it is encouraging that our efficacy data
not only closely mimics the Christchurch and meta-analysis results, but also the
results of the pivotal NINDS placebo-controlled trial. This trial demonstrated
at 39% rate of very favourable outcome (compared with our 37%), which compared
with placebo indicated a 30% greater likelihood of
recovery.1 It is furthermore reassuring that
the extension to the 4.5 hours window, based on the ECASS III
trial,4 has not adversely affected the overall
outcome in our series.
Despite significant benefit in the responder group, as
anticipated there are associated risks. While three of the four patients who
died suffered unrelated deaths one died as a direct result of treatment. It is
noteworthy that under the ECASS III protocol4
this patient would have been excluded due to his high NIHSS score. While some
patients and families may prefer to accept the higher bleeding risk and still
choose thrombolysis as it may offer the only hope of a meaningful recovery in
this situation we no longer routinely offer thrombolysis to patients with an
NIHSS of >25.
The patient with the borderline platelet count did not
come to harm and whether the ICH was related to the borderline platelet count
remains unclear. Several consultant haematolgists have indicated that the link
seems unlikely. Nonetheless, despite a lack of similar cases in the literature
one might conclude that treating in the setting of a borderline platelet count
should perhaps be avoided.
Delays in accomplishing a head CT in a centre with a
single available CT scanner and no after-hours on-site CT technicians is
understandable and results are in fact quite encouraging. However, the observed
delays by ambulance staff at the scene and in ED after the CT is obtained are
more difficult to understand and justify. These delays are most likely related
to limited awareness of the urgency with which these patients need to be
assessed and lack of familiarity with local protocols. This may, in part, be due
to a combination of frequent staff turn-over and relative infrequency of these
cases.
Some of the delays may also be attributable to poorly
written protocols and much effort has gone into collaborating with ED staff to
maximise user-friendliness. Similar efforts have gone into ongoing education of
ED staff and should go into education of ambulance staff. The latter can be
challenging as ambulance crews are typically trained off site and are thus not
under the direct influence of the local stroke team. Similarly difficult to
reach is the public who often continues to take the attitude of attempting to
“sleep off” the symptoms and thereby missing out on the opportunity
of treatment.
While this audit is very reassuring, it has to be
emphasized that supervision occurred by on site experienced neurologists , in
the setting of an organised stroke service with a formalised local thrombolysis
protocol and essentially no protocol violations. Thus it is not possible to draw
conclusions about the safety and efficacy of thrombolysis provided by less
experienced clinicians at even smaller centres around the country.
Even with neurologists on site a one-in-two roster is
difficult to maintain and alternative options, such as tele-medicine through
regional networks, ought to be explored by district health boards to further
increase patient access to this very effective therapy without exposing patients
to excessive risks.
Competing interests: None
known.
Author information: Annemarei Ranta,
Neurologist, Department of Neurology, MidCentral Health, Palmerston North;
Calvin Chan, House Surgeon, Department of Neurology, MidCentral Health,
Palmerston North, ; Dorothea Rump, Medical Elective Student, Department of
Neurology, MidCentral Health, Palmerston North; Pietro Cariga, Consultant
Neurologist, Department of Neurology, MidCentral Health, Palmerston North.
Correspondence: Dr Annemarei Ranta,
Department of Neurology, MidCentral Health, Private Bag 11036, Palmerston North
4442, New Zealand. Fax: +64 (0)6 3508391; email: anna.ranta@midcentraldhb.govt.nz
References:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current
issue | Search journal |
Archived issues | Classifieds
| Hotline (free ads) Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | Contact Us | Copyright | Other Journals |