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

New ACEP Clinical Policy on Transient Ischemic Attack

By Bruce M. Lo, MD, MBA, RDMS, FACEP | on September 6, 2016 | 0 Comment
ACEP Policy
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

In June 2016, the ACEP Board of Directors approved a new clinical policy on the evaluation of adult patients with suspected transient ischemic attack (TIA), which was developed by ACEP’s Clinical Policies Committee. This clinical policy can also be found on ACEP’s website and has been submitted for inclusion on the National Guideline Clearinghouse website.

You Might Also Like
  • New ACEP Clinical Policy on Transient Ischemic Attack
  • ACEP Clinical Policy on Acute Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
  • ACEP to Reconsider Clinical Policy on Use of Intravenous tPA to Manage Acute Ischemic Stroke in the ED

TIA is part of a spectrum that involves ischemia of the central nervous system, with approximately 240,000 cases a year in the United States. Although most TIAs last less than one to two hours, by definition, TIAs have a resolution of symptoms within 24 hours without evidence of an acute infarction on imaging. Since approximately 15 percent of all ischemic strokes are preceded by a TIA, timely evaluation for high-risk conditions, such as carotid stenosis and atrial fibrillation, is important.

Based on the feedback from the ACEP membership, the committee focused on four clinical questions about the evaluation of TIA in the emergency department. A systematic review of the evidence was conducted, and the committee made recommendations (A, B, or C) based on the strength of evidence (see Table 1). This clinical policy received input and comments from emergency physicians, neurologists, and members of the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association during the 60-day open-comment period. These responses were used to refine and enhance this clinical policy.

Table 1. Translation of Classes of Evidence to Recommendation Levels

Recommendations regarding each critical question were made by subcommittee members using results from strength of evidence grading, expert opinion, and consensus among subcommittee members according to the following guidelines:

Level A recommendations: Generally accepted principles for patient care that reflect a high degree of clinical certainty (eg, based on evidence from one or more Class of Evidence I or multiple Class of Evidence II studies).

Level B recommendations: Recommendations for patient care that may identify a particular strategy or range of strategies that reflect moderate clinical certainty (eg, based on evidence from one or more Class of Evidence II studies or strong consensus of Class of Evidence III studies).

Level C recommendations: Recommendations for patient care that are based on evidence from Class of Evidence III studies or, in the absence of any adequate published literature, based on expert consensus. In instances where consensus recommendations were made, “consensus” is placed in parentheses at the end of the recommendation.

Critical Questions and Recommendations

Question 1. In adult patients with suspected TIA, are there clinical decision rules that can identify patients at very low short-term risk for stroke who can be safely discharged from the emergency department?

Patient Management Recommendations

  • Level A: None specified.
  • Level B: In adult patients with suspected TIA, do not rely on current existing risk-stratification instruments (eg, ABCD2 score) to identify TIA patients who can be safely discharged from the emergency department.
  • Level C: None specified.

Question 2. In adult patients with suspected TIA, what imaging can be safely delayed from the initial ED workup?

Patient Management Recommendations

  • Level A: None specified.
  • Level B: None specified.
  • Level C: (1) The safety of delaying neuroimaging from the initial ED workup is unknown. If non-contrast brain MRI is not readily available, it’s reasonable for physicians to obtain a non-contrast head CT as part of the initial TIA workup to identify TIA mimics (eg, intracranial hemorrhage, mass lesion). However, non-contrast head CT should not be used to identify patients at high short-term risk for stroke. (2) When feasible, physicians should obtain MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging to identify patients at high short-term risk for stroke. (3) When feasible, physicians should obtain cervical vascular imaging (eg, carotid ultrasonography, CT angiography [CTA], or magnetic resonance angiography [MRA]) to identify patients at high short-term risk for stroke.

Question 3. In adult patients with suspected TIA, is carotid ultrasonography as accurate as neck CTA or MRA in identifying severe carotid stenosis?

Patient Management Recommendations

  • Level A: None specified.
  • Level B: None specified.
  • Level C: In adult patients with suspected TIA, carotid ultrasonography may be used to exclude severe carotid stenosis because it has an accuracy similar to that of MRA or CTA.

Question 4. In adult patients with suspected TIA, can a rapid ED-based diagnostic protocol safely identify patients at short-term risk for stroke?

Patient Management Recommendations

  • Level A: None specified.
  • Level B: In adult patients with suspected TIA without high-risk conditions, a rapid ED-based diagnostic protocol may be used to evaluate patients at short-term risk for stroke. (High-risk conditions include abnormal initial head CT result [if obtained], suspected embolic source [presence of atrial fibrillation, cardiomyopathy, or valvulopathy], known carotid stenosis, previous large stroke, and crescendo TIA.)
  • Level C: None specified.

Because of the high risk of stroke after a TIA, timely diagnostic testing for modifiable risk factors is important. This can be done in a number of ways, including an ED-based protocol (eg, ED observation) and should include neurovascular imaging.

While there are a number of risk-stratification instruments for TIA, none are currently sufficient in identifying patients who are at low short-term risk for stroke and who can be safely discharged from the emergency department. More research is needed to develop better risk-stratification instruments as well as to identify which diagnostics tests should be performed during the ED visit versus as an outpatient.


Dr. Lo is an associate professor of emergency medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School and medical director of the department of emergency medicine at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital, both in Norfolk, Virginia.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Multi-Page

Topics: ACEP Clinical PolicyClinical GuidelineNeurologicalStrokeTIATransient Ischemic Attack

Related

  • New Clinical Policy for Adult Patients with Acute Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

    May 7, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • Evidence Mounts Backing Rescue Ketamine for Prehospital Status Epilepticus

    April 30, 2025 - 0 Comment
  • Thrombolytics in Stroke: Moving Beyond Controversy to Comprehensive Care

    December 7, 2024 - 0 Comment

Current Issue

ACEP Now: June 2025 (Digital)

Read More

No Responses to “New ACEP Clinical Policy on Transient Ischemic Attack”

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