Nord, Charisse

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) stroke imaging software is becoming mainstay in many hub-and-spoke hospitals. Brainomix 360 Stroke software is the market leader in Europe focused on leveraging simple imaging (non-contrast computerized topography (NCCT) and CT angiography (CTA)) and has recently been FDA-cleared for use in the USA. We evaluated the implementation of Brainomix 360 AI Stroke software in the 17 spoke, multi-state Mayo Clinic Health System (MCHS) telestroke network. Methods: This prospective study compared decision and treatment times before and after Brainomix AI implementation, as well as clinician feedback and simulated decision making to better understand any changes seen. Patients were included if they underwent telestroke evaluation at an MCHS emergency department within 90 days of implementation (2/9/2024-8/8/2024), and excluded if they were already admitted to the hospital or if video evaluation was not performed. Data collection included demographics, clinical decisions and treatment times. Qualitative surveys were conducted at baseline and evaluation end, as well as simulated decision making in 20 de-identified cases randomized to with/without AI through an online portal. Results: A total of 907 patients were included (444 pre- and 463 post-implementation, 287 (32%) with ischemic stroke final diagnosis). Median NIHSS was 2. IVT was recommended in 20.3% (27/148 ischemic stroke patients) pre- and 25.9% (36/139) post-implementation. EVT was recommended in 16.2% (24/148) pre and 14.4% (20/139) post. AI use was associated with trends of faster telestroke activation to IVT decision (36 vs 32 mins, p=0.6), IVT administration (47 vs 40 minutes, p=0.6), and EVT decision (36 vs 33 minutes, p=0.5). In the simulation, imaging interpretation was significantly faster when randomized to AI use (3.4 vs 2.1 mins, p<0.001) and associated with improved physician confidence (62 vs 88%, p=0.004). Qualitative feedback from 14/24 neurologists showed the greatest perceived value was improved confidence of treatment decisions (43%) and faster triaging (36%). Most value was gained from e-ASPECTS (NCCT) and LVO modules. Conclusion: This service evaluation highlighted the opportunity to improve efficiency of decision making even in the setting of a well-developed telestroke system. The impact was underpinned by the improved speed and confidence of imaging interpretation reflected in an offline simulation and qualitative feedback.

Introduction: Central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) is an under-recognized stroke subtype that may benefit from hyperacute reperfusion therapies. We aimed to evaluate the ability of telestroke activations to provide CRAO diagnosis and thrombolysis. Methods: This retrospective observational study investigates all encounters conducted for acute visual loss between 2010 and 2021 in our multicentric Mayo Clinic Telestroke Network. Demographics, time from visual loss to telestroke evaluation, ocular examination, diagnostic, and therapeutic recommendations were collected for CRAO subjects. Results: Out of 9,511, 49 encounters (0.51%) were conducted for an acute ocular complaint. Five patients had possible CRAO, and 4 presented within 4.5 h from symptom onset (range 1.5–5 h). None received thrombolytic therapy. All telestroke physicians recommended ophthalmology consultation. Conclusion: Current telestroke assessment of acute visual loss is suboptimal and patients eligible for acute reperfusion therapies may not be offered treatment. Teleophthalmologic evaluations and advanced ophthalmic diagnostic tools should complement telestroke systems.