Abstract TP252: Extended Window TPA is Safe at Community Emergency Departments via Telestroke

Abstract

Introduction: Recent studies support tPA for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients presenting beyond 4.5 hours from last known well (LKW), if established infarct is not evident on advanced imaging. Many community hospitals, where AIS patients may be managed via telestroke (TS), lack advanced imaging capability and hesitate to administer off-label tPA. In our TS network, physicians adhere to an extended window tPA (EW) protocol also used in the hub emergency room; eligibility includes NIHSS≤25, <1/3 MCA territory hypodensity on CT brain, and off-label tPA consent. Here, we characterize patients receiving EW via TS and investigate safety. Methods: We identified 1,150 AIS patients who received tPA via TS (9/2015-12/2018). We compared baseline characteristics between patients who received EW (arrival >4.5 hrs) and those who received standard window tPA (SW, arrival ≤4.5 hrs). We explored clinical outcomes and describe incidence of adverse effects from tPA. Results: Forty patients received EW, with median ASPECTS of 9 (Q1-Q3: 9-10). Median LKW to arrival time was 491 mins with EW and 66 mins with SW (p<0.0001, Table 1). EW led to few tPA complications; symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage incidence was 2%. EW was given for more severe stroke than SW (median NIHSS 10 vs 7, p=0.011). Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics, except a higher rate of tobacco use with EW. EW patients had longer length of stay (median 5 vs 3, p=0.023) and were more likely to be discharged to rehab than home (OR: 2.05 (1.01 4.15), p=0.046), however a small number of EW patients precludes in-depth comparative outcomes analysis. Conclusions: Our data suggest that EW is safe via TS for select patients with favorable CT, in settings that may lack advanced imaging capability. A specified mismatch between NIHSS and acute ischemia on plain CT is not part of our EW protocol, however EW is more likely given for severe stroke in our TS network. Small sample size warrants further study on clinical outcomes.