A Reduction in Time with Electronic Monitoring in Stroke (ARTEMIS): Study protocol for a randomised multicentre trial

Introduction Time is the most crucial factor limiting efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and intra-arterial thrombectomy (IAT). The delay between alarming the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) dispatch office and IVT/IAT initiation, that is, the 'total system delay' (TSD), depends on logistics and team effort. A promising method to reduce TSD is real-time audio-visual feedback to caregivers involved. With 'A Reduction in Time with Electronic Monitoring in Stroke' (ARTEMIS), we aim to investigate the effect of real-time audio-visual feedback on actual TSD to IVT/IAT to caregivers. Methods and analysis ARTEMIS is a multiregional, multicentre, randomised open end-point trial including patients ≥18 years considered IVT/IAT-eligible by the EMS dispatch office or on-site EMS personnel. Patients are electronically tracked and randomised for real-time audio-visual feedback on TSD to caregivers via premounted handhelds and tablets throughout the TSD trajectory. Primary outcome is TSD to IVT/IAT. Secondary outcomes comprise proportion of IVT/IAT-treated patients, symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage, IVT/IAT-treated stroke mimics, clinical outcome after three months and cost-effectiveness. Separate analyses for IAT-patients with or without prior IVT, within or out of office hours and EMS region will be performed. With 75 IAT-patients and 225 IVT-patients in each arm, we will be able to demonstrate a 20 min difference in TSD to IAT and a 10 min difference in TSD to IVT (p=0.05 and power=0.8). Ethics and dissemination Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and (inter)national conference presentations. Trial registration number NCT02808806; Pre-results

A Reduction in Time with Electronic Monitoring In Stroke (ARTEMIS) : study protocol for a randomised multicentre trial

INTRODUCTION: Time is the most crucial factor limiting efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and intra-arterial thrombectomy (IAT). The delay between alarming the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) dispatch office and IVT/IAT initiation, that is, the 'total system delay' (TSD), depends on logistics and team effort. A promising method to reduce TSD is real-time audio-visual feedback to caregivers involved. With 'A Reduction in Time with Electronic Monitoring in Stroke' (ARTEMIS), we aim to investigate the effect of real-time audio-visual feedback on actual TSD to IVT/IAT to caregivers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ARTEMIS is a multiregional, multicentre, randomised open end-point trial including patients ≥18 years considered IVT/IAT-eligible by the EMS dispatch office or on-site EMS personnel. Patients are electronically tracked and randomised for real-time audio-visual feedback on TSD to caregivers via premounted handhelds and tablets throughout the TSD trajectory. Primary outcome is TSD to IVT/IAT. Secondary outcomes comprise proportion of IVT/IAT-treated patients, symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage, IVT/IAT-treated stroke mimics, clinical outcome after three months and cost-effectiveness. Separate analyses for IAT-patients with or without prior IVT, within or out of office hours and EMS region will be performed. With 75 IAT-patients and 225 IVT-patients in each arm, we will be able to demonstrate a 20 min difference in TSD to IAT and a 10 min difference in TSD to IVT (p=0.05 and power=0.8). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and (inter)national conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02808806; Pre-results

Clinical prediction of thrombectomy eligibility : A systematic review and 4-item decision tree

BACKGROUND: A clinical large anterior vessel occlusion (LAVO)-prediction scale could reduce treatment delays by allocating intra-arterial thrombectomy (IAT)-eligible patients directly to a comprehensive stroke center. AIM: To subtract, validate and compare existing LAVO-prediction scales, and develop a straightforward decision support tool to assess IAT-eligibility. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify LAVO-prediction scales. Performance was compared in a prospective, multicenter validation cohort of the Dutch acute Stroke study (DUST) by calculating area under the receiver operating curves (AUROC). With group lasso regression analysis, we constructed a prediction model, incorporating patient characteristics next to National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) items. Finally, we developed a decision tree algorithm based on dichotomized NIHSS items. RESULTS: We identified seven LAVO-prediction scales. From DUST, 1316 patients (35.8% LAVO-rate) from 14 centers were available for validation. FAST-ED and RACE had the highest AUROC (both >0.81, p  < 0.01 for comparison with other scales). Group lasso analysis revealed a LAVO-prediction model containing seven NIHSS items (AUROC 0.84). With the GACE (Gaze, facial Asymmetry, level of Consciousness, Extinction/inattention) decision tree, LAVO is predicted (AUROC 0.76) for 61% of patients with assessment of only two dichotomized NIHSS items, and for all patients with four items. CONCLUSION: External validation of seven LAVO-prediction scales showed AUROCs between 0.75 and 0.83. Most scales, however, appear too complex for Emergency Medical Services use with prehospital validation generally lacking. GACE is the first LAVO-prediction scale using a simple decision tree as such increasing feasibility, while maintaining high accuracy. Prehospital prospective validation is planned