DOI: 10.1161/svin.123.001213 ISSN: 2694-5746

Evaluating Transport Strategies and Local Hospital Impact on Stroke Outcomes: A RACECAT Trial Substudy

Marta Olive‐Gadea, Marc Rodrigo‐Gisbert, Alvaro Garcia‐Tornel, Salvatore Rudilosso, Alejandro Rodríguez, Antonio Doncel‐Moriano, Mariano Facundo Werner, Arturo Renú, Marian Muchada, Manuel Requena, Federica Rizzo, Natalia Pérez de la Ossa, Sònia Abilleira, Marc Ribo, Xabier Urra,
Show PDF Cite

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for transferring patients to specialized acute stroke care remains controversial. This substudy of the Effect of Direct Transportation to Thrombectomy‐Capable Center vs Local Stroke Center on Neurological Outcomes in Patients with suspected Large‐Vessel Occlusion Stroke in Nonurban Areas (RACECAT) trial aims to investigate the impact of local hospital characteristics and performance on the optimal transport strategy and stroke outcomes.

METHODS

This was a secondary post hoc analysis of the RACECAT trial, evaluating factors potentially associated with functional outcomes among patients initially evaluated at a local stroke center (Local‐SC) versus a thrombectomy‐capable center. The primary outcome was the shift in the 90‐day modified Rankin Scale score in the target population of the RACECAT trial. Door‐to‐needle time, level of care of the Local‐SC (telestroke versus primary stroke center), the specialty of the physician involved with therapeutic decisions, and Local‐SC case volume were assessed for subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 1367 patients included in the analysis, 903 had acute ischemic strokes (modified intention to treat). The 90‐day modified Rankin Scale score was associated with door‐to‐needle time in the entire modified intention‐to‐treat cohort ( P  = 0.026) and in patients initially evaluated in a Local‐SC ( P  = 0.063), and with local hospital level of care (telestroke versus primary stroke center; P  = 0.10). There was a trend favoring direct transport to thrombectomy‐capable center for patients whose assigned Local‐SC was a telestroke center (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.47 [95% CI, 0.93–2.33] versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.71–1.24]; P interaction  = 0.08) or had door‐to‐needle time over the global median (adjusted OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 0.97–2.40] versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.71–1.25]; P interaction  = 0.06). In patients with confirmed large‐vessel occlusion, the benefit of direct transport to thrombectomy‐capable centers when the Local‐SC was a telestroke center ( P interaction  = 0.04) or had longer door‐to‐needle time ( P interaction  = 0.07) was more evident.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct transport to thrombectomy‐capable centers may be preferable in areas primarily covered by telestroke or Local‐SCs with poorer performance, especially in patients with large‐vessel occlusion. These findings can contribute to refining prehospital triage strategies and optimizing stroke systems of care.

More from our Archive