Discrepancy rates in reporting of acute stroke CT

Stroke scan agnosia - What radiologists may not see

OBJECTIVE

Neuroimaging helps neurologists make accurate diagnoses. We used a multidisciplinary review system to search for perceptual discrepancies in stroke lesions. We sought to identify recurrent pitfalls in the detection of neuroimaging stroke lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were selected from a neuroimaging database of second opinions if cerebrovascular lesions had been missed at initial reporting. Patient demographics, scanning modality and stroke type were recorded.

RESULTS

A neuroradiologist second opinion was provided for 1336 patients. Forty-four patients, 18 women and 26 men, mean age 59.9 (SD 14.2) years, were identified in whom a vascular lesion was not detected on initial reporting. The lesions included cerebellar infarcts in 17 patients (bilateral in 7), pontine infarction/ischaemia (n=5), pontine and cerebellar lesions (n=1) and spinal infarction (n=1). Supratentorial infarction occurred in 10 patients of which 3 were thalamic infarcts. Vessel abnormalities were present in 8 patients (hyperdense vessel n=3, dissection n=3, middle cerebral artery occlusion on CTA n=1 and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis n=1). Convexity subarachnoid hemorrhage was missed and a subdural hematoma was not identified in one patient. In 10 (23 %) patients the missed lesions occurred solely on CT brain scanning. The missed lesions were symptomatic in 28 (64 %) patients and presentations were acute in 14 (32 %) patients.

CONCLUSION

Some cerebrovascular lesions are prone to perceptual errors with CT and MRI brain scanning. Radiologists and neurologists should be aware that posterior fossa lesions (particularly in the cerebellum and pons) and hyperdense vessel signs may be missed. Better identification of radiological cerebrovascular lesions should enhance management of acute and chronic stroke patients.

Factors delaying intravenous thrombolytic therapy in acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This review examined factors that delay thrombolysis and what management strategies are currently employed to minimise this delay, with the aim of suggesting future directions to overcome bottlenecks in treatment delivery.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy included a combination of synonyms and controlled vocabularies from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and EmTree covering brain ischemia, cerebrovascular accident, fibrinolytic therapy and Alteplase. The search was conducted using Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), PubMed and Cochrane Library databases using truncations and Boolean operators. The literature search excluded review articles, trial protocols, opinion pieces and case reports. Inclusion criteria were: (1) The article directly related to thrombolysis in ischaemic stroke, and (2) The article examined at least one factor contributing to delay in thrombolytic therapy.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-two studies were included. Pre-hospital factors resulted in the greatest delay to thrombolysis administration. In-hospital factors relating to assessment, imaging and thrombolysis administration also contributed. Long onset-to-needle times were more common in those with atypical, or less severe, symptoms, the elderly, patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and those living alone. Various strategies currently exist to reduce delays. Processes which have achieved the greatest improvements in time to thrombolysis are those which integrate out-of-hospital and in-hospital processes, such as the Helsinki model.

CONCLUSION

Further integrated processes are required to maximise patient benefit from thrombolysis. Expansion of community education to incorporate less common symptoms and provision of alert pagers for patients may provide further reduction in thrombolysis times.