Hiyama Nagayasu, Yoshimura Shinichi, Shirakawa Manabu, Uchida Kazutaka, Oki Yoshiharu, Shindo Seigo, Tokuda Kou
Department of Neurosurgery, Hyogo College of Medicine.
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2016 Dec 15;56(12):731-736. doi: 10.2176/nmc.oa.2016-0102. Epub 2016 Jul 14.
This study analyzed the efficacy and safety of the "drip, ship, and retrieve (DSR)" approach used to improve patient access to thrombectomy for acute stroke.
The study participants were 45 patients who underwent thrombectomy following intravenous tissue plasminogen activator between September 2013 and August 2015. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they were transferred from another hospital (DSR group; n = 33) or were brought in directly (Direct group; n = 12). The two groups were compared based on their baseline characteristics, time from stroke onset to reperfusion, outcome, and adverse events.
There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. Time from onset until admission to our facility was significantly shorter in the Direct group (56.9 min) than in the DSR group (163.5 min) (P <0.0001). Conversely, time from arrival at the hospital to arterial puncture was significantly shorter in the DSR group (25.0 min) than in the Direct group (109.5 min) (P <0.0001). Time from onset to reperfusion did not differ significantly between the groups. There was no significant difference in patient outcomes, with a modified Rankin scale score of 0-2 (44.8% in DSR group versus 48.7% in Direct group). Moreover, there was no difference in the incidence of adverse events.
Despite the time required to transfer patients in the DSR group between hospitals, reducing the time from arrival until commencement of endovascular therapy meant that the time from onset to reperfusion was approximately equivalent to that of the Direct group.
Time-saving measures need to be taken by both the transferring and receiving hospitals in DSR paradigm.
本研究分析了“滴注、转运和取栓(DSR)”方法在改善急性卒中患者接受取栓治疗可及性方面的疗效和安全性。
研究参与者为2013年9月至2015年8月期间在静脉注射组织型纤溶酶原激活剂后接受取栓治疗的45例患者。根据患者是从另一家医院转运而来(DSR组;n = 33)还是直接送来(直接组;n = 12)分为两组。比较两组的基线特征、从中风发作到再灌注的时间、结局和不良事件。
基线特征无显著差异。直接组从发病到入住本院的时间(56.9分钟)显著短于DSR组(163.5分钟)(P <0.0001)。相反,DSR组从到达医院到动脉穿刺的时间(25.0分钟)显著短于直接组(109.5分钟)(P <0.0001)。两组从发病到再灌注的时间无显著差异。患者结局无显著差异,改良Rankin量表评分为0 - 2分(DSR组为44.8%,直接组为48.7%)。此外,不良事件发生率无差异。
尽管DSR组患者在医院之间转运需要时间,但减少从到达医院到开始血管内治疗的时间意味着从发病到再灌注的时间与直接组大致相当。
在DSR模式下,转运医院和接收医院都需要采取节省时间的措施。