Background:It is a well-known fact that very few patients of stroke arrive at the hospital within the window period of thrombolysis. Even among those who do, not all receive thrombolytic therapy.Objective:The objectives of this study were to determine the proportion of early arrival ischemic strokes (within 6 h of stroke onset) in our hospital and to evaluate the causes of nonadministration of intravenous and/or intraarterial thrombolysis in them.Materials and Methods:Data of all early arrival acute stroke patients between January 2010 and January 2015 were included. Factors determining nonadministration of intravenous and/or intraarterial thrombolysis in early arrival strokes were analyzed.Results:Out of 2,593 stroke patients, only 145 (5.6%) patients presented within 6 h of stroke onset and among them 118 (81.4%) patients had ischemic stroke and 27 (18.6%) patients had hemorrhagic stroke. A total of 89/118 (75.4%) patients were thrombolyzed. The reasons for nonadministration of thrombolysis in the remaining 29 patients were analyzed, which included unavoidable factors in 8/29 patients [massive infarct (N = 4), hemorrhagic infarct (N = 1), gastrointestinal bleed (N = 1), oral anticoagulant usage with prolonged international normalized ratio (INR) (N = 1), and recent cataract surgery (N = 1)]. Avoidable factors were found for 21/29 patients, include nonaffordability (N = 7), fear of bleed (N = 4), rapidly improving symptoms (N = 4), mild stroke (N = 2), delayed neurologist referral within the hospital (N = 2), and logistic difficulty in organizing endovascular treatment (N = 2).Conclusion:One-fourth of early ischemic stroke patients in our study were not thrombolyzed even though they arrived within the window period. The majority of the reasons for nonadministration of thrombolysis were potentially preventable, such as nonaffordability, intrahospital delay, and nonavailability of newer endovascular interventions.

Background:Intrasinus thrombolysis (IST) is believed to improve outcome in patients of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) unresponsive to heparin.Purpose:The purpose of this article is to describe our experience with IST in patients of CVST unresponsive to heparin.Materials and Methods:Hospital databases were searched, and patients with CVST who underwent IST from May 2011 to March 2014 were identified. Data on clinical presentation, duration of symptoms, and indications and dosage of IST were retrieved and outcomes analyzed.Results:Twenty-four patients received IST. The presenting symptoms included headache (n = 19), seizures (n = 16), and altered sensorium (n = 14); signs included papilledema (n = 20) and hemiparesis (n = 15). Nineteen patients received unfractionated heparin (UFH), four received low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and one received both. In one patient, microcatheter could not be passed, two patients bled intracranially, and three had nonintracranial bleeds. Among four deaths, none was due to iatrogenic bleeding. On discharge, 10 patients (43.5%) had good improvement with the modified Rankin Scale (score; mRS) ≤2 and eight (34.8%) had partial improvement with mRS = 3, 4. Seventeen patients (73.9%) had mRS ≤2 at 6 months follow-up. Bleeding complications of urokinase were less than those of alteplase. Recanalization of the involved sinuses was achieved in all. Early intervention led to successful recanalization. Functional recanalization decreased intracranial bleeding.Conclusion:Till date, our study is the largest series of IST in CVST reported from India. IST may be more effective than systemic heparin anticoagulation in moribund and unresponsive patients despite the potential for bleeding manifestations. Functional recanalization is adequate for good results. However, a randomized prospective study comparing heparin anticoagulation with IST is warranted.

No abstract

No abstract