Drip-and-Ship Thrombolytic Treatment Paradigm Among Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients in the United States

Zeenat Qureshi Stroke Research Center, Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC 295, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Stroke (Impact Factor: 5.72). 06/2012; 43(7):1971-4. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.657817
Source: PubMed


To provide a national assessment of thrombolytic administration using drip-and-ship treatment paradigm.
Patients treated with the drip-and-ship paradigm among all acute ischemic stroke patients treated with thrombolytic treatment were identified within the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Thrombolytic utilization, patterns of referral, comparative in-hospital outcomes, and hospitalization charges related to drip-and-ship paradigm were determined. All the in-hospital outcomes were analyzed after adjusting for potential confounders using multivariate analysis.
Of the 22 243 ischemic stroke patients who received thrombolytic treatment, 4474 patients (17%) were treated using drip-and-ship paradigm. Of these 4474 patients, 81% were referred to urban teaching hospitals for additional care, and 7% of them received follow-up endovascular treatment. States with a higher proportion of patients treated using the drip-and-ship paradigm had higher rates of overall thrombolytic utilization (5.4% versus 3.3%; P<0.001). The rate of home discharge/self-care was significantly higher in patients treated with drip-and-ship paradigm compared with those who received thrombolytics through primary emergency department arrival in the multivariate analysis (OR, 1.198; 95% CI, 1.019-1.409; P=0.0286).
One of every 6 thrombolytic-treated patients in United States is treated using drip-and-ship paradigm. States with the highest proportion of drip-and-ship cases were also the states with the highest thrombolytic utilization.

Download full-text


Available from: Ameer E Hassan, Oct 27, 2015
  • Source
    • "The drip-and-ship treatment paradigm involves commencing IV tPA in stroke patients in smaller community hospitals prior to transfer to larger tertiary stroke centres to undergo IA therapy [32]. While this has been shown to be a safe treatment strategy, it may worsen onset-to-treatment times [33]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The three randomised controlled trials, Interventional Management of Stroke III (IMS3), Mechanical Retrieval and Revascularization of Stroke Clots Using Embolectomy (MR RESCUE) and Synthesis Expanasion: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Intra-Arterial Versus Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischaemic Stroke (SYNTHESIS EXP) showed no significant difference in clinical outcomes comparing intra-arterial (IA) therapy with intravenous thrombolysis. This article will explore the reasons for failure to show superiority of IA therapy. Summary: There are many reasons for the disappointing results of the three randomised controlled trials. Opposing views on IA therapy exist. Critics argue that only a small percentage of patients will be eligible for IA therapy and that it will never be cost-effective. Additionally, current trials have failed to address superior recanalization rates of new generation devices and lack of patient selection by advanced imaging. Time-to-treatment is longer in these randomised controlled trials and stroke outcomes were worse than anticipated. The current randomised controlled trials also took long periods to complete. There is emerging evidence that general anesthetic negatively influences outcome. Next generation trials will attempt to address these issues. Key Messages: There are disparate explanations for the disappointing results from the three IA therapy randomized controlled studies. Poor recanalisation rates with first generation endovascular devices, lack of advanced neuroimaging to aid in patient selection, lack of data surrounding the use of general anaesthesia, and prolonged time-to-treatment are potential contributors to negative results. The new generation of trials has the potential of addressing these pressing issues.
    Full-text · Article · May 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The current guidelines do not recommend increasing the dose of intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV rt-PA) for ischemic stroke patients weighing >100 kg. Obese patients are therefore receiving an IV rt-PA dose <0.9 mg/kg; however, the consequences of such underdosing are unknown. Our goal was to determine the relationship between obesity and clinical outcomes among acute ischemic stroke patients receiving IV rt-PA. Methods: Data from all patients admitted to US hospitals between 2002 and 2009 who were treated with IV thrombolysis and who had a primary discharge diagnosis of stroke were included. The effect of obesity on rates of intracerebral hemorrhage and discharge outcomes was analyzed after adjusting for potential confounders using logistic regression analysis. Results: Of the 81,579 patients with ischemic stroke treated with IV rt-PA, 5174 (6.3%) were categorized as obese. The intracerebral hemorrhage rates in obese and nonobese patients were significantly different (4.5% v 6.3%; P = .01). After adjusting for age, sex, presence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, location/teaching status and All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group severity scale, there was no difference in the rates of no to minimal disability between obese and nonobese patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-1.2; P = .8). Obese patients had lower odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.5-0.8; P = .001) but also more likely to be discharged with moderate to severe disability (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.01-1.3; P = .03). Conclusions: Obese patients receiving IV rt-PA treatment for acute ischemic stroke appear to have a higher survival rate most likely related to their decreased rates of intracerebral hemorrhage.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2013 · Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases: the official journal of National Stroke Association
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Enrollment of subjects in acute stroke trials is often hindered by narrow timeframes, because a large proportion of patients arrive via transfers from outside facilities rather than primary arrival at the enrolling hospital. Telemedicine networks have been increasingly utilized for provision of care for acute stroke patients at facilities outside of major academic centers. Treatment decisions made through Telemedicine networks in patients with acute ischemic stroke have been shown to be safe, reliable, and effective. With the expanding use of this technology and the impediments to enrolling subjects into clinical trials, this approach can be applied successfully to the field of clinical research. The antihypertensive treatment of acute cerebral hemorrhage II trial is a phase III randomized multicenter trial that has developed a protocol in collaboration with participating sites to implement the use of Telemedicine networks for the enrollment of research subjects. The protocol describes the operating procedures and legal and Institutional Review Board perspectives for its implementation.
    No preview · Article · Jun 2013 · Journal of vascular and interventional neurology
Show more