Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

Clinical Scores Fail to Identify Large-Artery Occlusion in Stroke Patients

By Will Boggs, MD (Reuters Health) | on June 9, 2016 | 0 Comment
ED Critical Care
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Clinical scales currently in use do not accurately identify large-artery occlusion (LAO) in patients with acute ischemic stroke, researchers from France report.

You Might Also Like
  • Endovascular Treatment May Help Stroke Patients with Large Ischemic Core, Mismatch Profile
  • Clinical Policy on tPA for Ischemic Stroke Important for Emergency Medicine
  • Pain Scales Often Fail to Capture What ED Patients Feel

Clinical scales are commonly used to identify stroke patients with LAO so that they can be triaged to the nearest comprehensive stroke center (CSC) for thrombectomy, yet data on the predictive value of these scales are scarce.

Dr. Guillaume Turc and colleagues from Hospital Sainte-Anne and Paris Descartes University investigated the accuracy of 13 published clinical scores in predicting LAO in 1,004 patients with acute ischemic stroke admitted within six hours of symptom onset. Among these patients, 328 (32.7%) had an LAO, according to the April 28 online report in Stroke.

A National Institutes of Health Stroke Score (NIHSS) score of 11 or greater had the highest accuracy (79%), but false-negative rates (FNR) were 16% or higher for all but four of the published cutoffs: out of hospital NIHSS/Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Severity Scale (CPSS) 1 or greater (4%); abbreviated NIHSS 1 or greater (5%); NIHSS score 4 or greater (7%); NIHSS score 5 or greater (10%).

“We found that although several clinical scores showed a good accuracy to predict LAO, at least 20% of patients with LAO would be missed when applying published cutoffs,” the researchers noted. “Moreover, cutoffs reducing the FNR to 10% (or greater) were associated with an FPR of at least 45%. We were unable to identify a reliable cutoff to rule out LAO.”

“Altogether, our findings call into question the usefulness of a clinical score to identify the best candidates for thrombectomy,” they concluded. “Indeed, even in the best case scenario (all patients in our cohort had a confirmed ischemic stroke and were examined by a stroke neurologist), clinical scales could not reliably identify patients with LAO. Therefore, although clinical scores may provide a rough estimate of the probability of LAO, MRA or CTA should be performed in all patients with symptomatic ischemic stroke presenting within 6 hours of symptom onset.”

Dr. Ashutosh Jadhav from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center in Pennsylvania told Reuters Health by email, “A major issue in acute stroke care is triaging the right patient to the right hospital. In our recent analysis of the SWIFT PRIME trial, we found that patients with large vessel occlusions who initially presented to a non-endovascular-capable center had greater than 90 minutes’ delay in symptom onset to groin puncture times compared to those who presented directly to the endovascular-capable center. This highlights the importance of being able to identify patients directly in the field that may be better candidates for direct presentation to an endovascular center.”

Pages: 1 2 | Single Page

Topics: ClinicalCritical CareEndovascular ThrombectomyLarge-Artery OcclusionLarge-Vessel OcclusionOutcomeStrokeSymptomatic Ischemic Stroke

Related

  • Case Report: When Syncope Gets Hairy

    June 17, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • New Clinical Policy for Adult Patients with Acute Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

    May 7, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • How to Diagnose Eating Disorders in the Emergency Department

    March 11, 2025 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: June 2025 (Digital)

Read More

No Responses to “Clinical Scores Fail to Identify Large-Artery Occlusion in Stroke Patients”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*


Current Issue

ACEP Now: June 2025 (Digital)

Read More

Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 2333-2603