Audebert Heinrich J, Kukla Christian, Vatankhah Bijan, Gotzler Berthold, Schenkel Johannes, Hofer Stephan, Fürst Andrea, Haberl Roman L
Department of Neurology, Städtisches Klinikum München GmbH, Klinikum Harlaching, München, Germany.
Stroke. 2006 Jul;37(7):1822-7. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000226741.20629.b2. Epub 2006 Jun 8.
Systemic thrombolysis is the only therapy proven to be effective for ischemic stroke. Telemedicine may help to extend its use. However, concerns remain whether management and safety of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) administration after telemedical consultation are equivalent in less experienced hospitals compared with tPA administration in academic stroke centers.
During the second year of the ongoing Telemedical Pilot Project for Integrative Stroke Care, all systemic thrombolyses in stroke patients of the 12 regional clinics and the 2 stroke centers were recorded prospectively. Patients' demographics, stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), frequency of administration, time management, protocol violations, and safety were included in the analysis.
In 2004, 115 of 4727 stroke or transient ischemic attack patients (2.4%) in the community hospitals and 110 of 1889 patients in the stroke centers (5.8%) received systemic thrombolysis. Prehospital latencies were shorter in the regional hospitals despite longer distances. Door to needle times were shorter in the stroke centers. Although blood pressure was controlled more strictly in community hospitals, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage rate (7.8%) was higher (P=0.14) than in stroke centers (2.7%) but still within the range of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke trial. In-hospital mortality rate was low in community hospitals (3.5%) and in stroke centers (4.5%).
Although with a lower rate of systemic thrombolysis, there was no evidence of lower treatment quality in the remote hospitals. With increasing numbers of tPA administration and growing training effects, the telestroke concept promises better coverage of systemic thrombolysis in nonurban areas.
全身溶栓是唯一被证实对缺血性卒中有效的治疗方法。远程医疗可能有助于扩大其应用范围。然而,与学术性卒中中心的组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)给药相比,经验较少的医院在远程医疗咨询后进行tPA给药的管理和安全性是否相当,仍存在疑问。
在正在进行的卒中综合护理远程医疗试点项目的第二年,前瞻性记录了12个地区诊所和2个卒中中心的卒中患者的所有全身溶栓情况。分析纳入了患者的人口统计学资料、卒中严重程度(美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表)、给药频率、时间管理、方案违规情况和安全性。
2004年,社区医院的4727例卒中或短暂性脑缺血发作患者中有115例(2.4%)接受了全身溶栓,卒中中心的1889例患者中有110例(5.8%)接受了全身溶栓。尽管距离较远,但地区医院的院前延迟时间较短。卒中中心的门到针时间较短。尽管社区医院对血压控制更为严格,但症状性脑出血率(7.8%)高于卒中中心(2.7%)(P=0.14),但仍在国立神经疾病和卒中研究所试验的范围内。社区医院和卒中中心的院内死亡率均较低(分别为3.5%和4.5%)。
尽管全身溶栓率较低,但没有证据表明偏远医院的治疗质量较低。随着tPA给药数量的增加和培训效果的增强,远程卒中概念有望在非城市地区更好地覆盖全身溶栓治疗。