Background and Purpose-Timely referral of appropriate patients to acute stroke units is necessary for effective provision of skilled care. We compared the characteristics of referrals with suspected stroke to an academic acute stroke unit via 3 primary referral routes: ambulance paramedics using a rapid ambulance protocol and stroke recognition instrument, the Face Arm Speech Test; primary care doctors (PCDs); and emergency room (ER) referrals.

No abstract

SummaryBackgroundStents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy.MethodsThe International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470.FindingsThe trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4·0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3·2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·28, 95% CI 0·77–2·11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8·5% in the stenting group compared with 5·2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1·69, 1·16–2·45, p=0·006). Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1·92, 1·27–2·89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2·76, 1·16–6·56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0·0197).InterpretationCompletion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.FundingMedical Research Council, the Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, European Union.

Background and Purpose-Patients with suspected stroke first assessed by ambulance paramedics require early recognition to facilitate appropriate triage and early treatment. We determined paramedic's accuracy in detecting acute stroke signs by comparing agreement between neurological signs recorded in the Face Arm Speech Test (FAST), a stroke recognition instrument, by paramedics on the scene and by stroke physicians after admission. Methods-Suspected stroke patients admitted by ambulance paramedics directly to an acute stroke unit through a rapid ambulance protocol were examined by a trainee stroke neurologist or admitting stroke physician over a 1-year period. Recorded neurological signs (facial weakness, arm weakness, speech disturbance) in confirmed acute stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) cases were compared between paramedics and the stroke neurologist/physician. Results-Ambulance crews referred 278 suspected stroke patients of whom 217 (78%) had confirmed stroke (nϭ189) or TIA (nϭ28); 95% were examined by the stroke neurologist (median 18 hours after paramedic assessment). Recorded signs and agreement between paramedics and stroke physicians in confirmed stroke group were: facial weakness, 68% versus 70% (ϭ0.49; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.62); arm weakness, 96% versus 95% (ϭ0.77; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.99); and speech disturbance, 79% versus 77% (ϭ0.69; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.82). Interrater agreement was complete for arm weakness in 98% cases. Conclusions-Recognition of neurological deficits by ambulance paramedics using FAST shows good agreement with physician assessment, even allowing for temporal evolution of deficits. The high prevalence and good agreement for arm weakness suggest that this sign may have the greatest usefulness for prehospital ambulance triage and paramedic-based neuroprotective trials.