Kim, Brian S.

Introduction: There has been a shift in prehospital systems of care to prioritize transporting acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with suspected emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) stroke to thrombectomy capable stroke centers (TSCs), as opposed to primary stroke centers (PSCs) which may be closer and offer intravenous thrombolysis faster. Large scale data on clinical outcomes in direct triage are lacking. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines with the Nested Knowledge AutoLit platform to search PubMed for relevant terms from 01/2015 to 05/2022. Our primary endpoint was proportion of patients with a good clinical outcome [modified Rankin Score (mRS) 0-2] at 90 days. Results: We identified 390 studies, 16 of which compared direct triage to various models and were included. Amongst these, Mobile Stroke Unit (MSU; n=1), Mothership only (n=1), Drip-and-Ship only (n=3), and Mothership + Drip-and-Ship (n=11) were compared to Direct Triage. Among the eleven that reported 90-day functional status outcomes, there were no discernible trends. Four studies that compared 90-day functional outcomes amongst patients who received EVT and compared Direct Triage to Drip-and-Ship + Mothership models were analyzed. Baseline age, sex, and presenting NIHSS were similar. Patients who underwent Direct Triage were more likely to have a good outcome (mRS 0-2) at 90-days (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.76). Conclusions: Amongst patients who received EVT, patients who underwent Direct Triage were more likely to have better functional outcomes at 90 days. Direct Triage of AIS patients is a promising strategy to improve clinical outcomes in patients who undergo EVT. More research is needed in patients who do not receive EVT.

Background Prophylactic use of inferior vena cava filters to prevent pulmonary embolism in trauma is controversial. The practice varies between hospitals and countries, in part due to conflicting evidence and guidelines. Purpose To compare the effects of pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis and mortality in two hospitals using prophylactic inferior vena cava filter placement or prophylactic anticoagulation alone. Material and Methods Patients presenting with severe trauma were recruited from two level-1 trauma centres between January 2008 and December 2013. Recruited patients from an US hospital having prophylactic inferior vena cava filter inserted were compared to a Scandinavian hospital using prophylactic anticoagulation alone. Inclusion criteria were age >15 years, Injury Severity Score >15 and survival >24 h after hospital admission. Patients with venous thromboembolism diagnosed prior to inferior vena cava filter placement were excluded. A Cox proportional hazard regression model was used with adjustment for immortal time bias and predictor variables. Results In total, 951 patients were reviewed, 282 from an US hospital having inferior vena cava filters placed and 669 from a Scandinavian hospital without inferior vena cava filters. The mean age was 45.9 vs. 47.4 years and the mean Injury Severity Score was 29.8 vs. 25.9, respectively. Inferior vena cava filter placement was not associated with the hazard of pulmonary embolism (Hazard ratio=0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12, 1.45; P=0.17) or mortality (Hazard ratio=1.16; 95% CI 0.70, 1.95; P=0.56). However, an increased rate of deep venous thrombosis was observed with inferior vena cava filters in place (Hazard ratio=3.75; 95% CI 1.68, 8.36; P=0.001). Conclusion In severely injured trauma patients, prophylactic inferior vena cava filter placement was not associated with pulmonary embolism or mortality. However, inferior vena cava filters were associated with increased rate of deep venous thrombosis.