scholarly journals Determinants of Patient Delay in Transient Ischemic Attack

2019 ◽  
Vol 81 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 139-144
Author(s):  
L. Servaas Dolmans ◽  
Arno W. Hoes ◽  
Marie-Louise E.L. Bartelink ◽  
L. Jaap Kappelle ◽  
Frans H. Rutten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Preventive Treatment ◽  
Patient Delay ◽  
Medical Emergency ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Definite Diagnosis ◽  
Ischemic Attack ◽  
Initial Perception ◽  
First Contact

Introduction: Early diagnosis and stroke preventive treatment in patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) are crucial, but hampered by delayed reporting of symptoms. Previous studies on causes of patient delay provided inconsistent results. We aimed to assess determinants of patient delay among patients with symptoms suggestive of TIA. Methods: We interviewed participants referred by their general practitioner to an outpatient TIA clinic within 72 h from symptom onset. We determined (i) the exact time from symptom onset to the first contact with a medical service (patient delay); (ii) demographic and clinical characteristics; (iii) patient’s initial perception, and reaction to symptoms; and (iv) patient’s knowledge about TIA. We used multivariable linear regression to identify determinants of patient delay. Results: We interviewed 202 suspected TIA patients (mean age 67.7 (SD 13.7) years, 111 (55.0%) male), of whom 123 (60.9%) received a definite diagnosis of TIA or minor stroke. Median patient delay was 1.5 (interquartile range 0.4–14.6) hours. Of all patients, 119 (58.9%) considered a TIA (or stroke) as the cause of their symptoms. Among them, 30 (25.2%) thought it was a medical emergency, while of the 83 not considering TIA as the cause of symptoms 38 (45.8%) thought of a medical emergency. Independently related to increased delay were (i) symptom onset out of hours, (ii) absence of dysarthria, (iii) being unaware that TIA requires urgent treatment, (iv) not considering the event an emergency, and (v) knowledge of TIA symptoms. Results for patients with a definite diagnosis of TIA/minor stroke were similar to those with alternative diagnoses. Conclusion: Patients still tend to wait till office hours to report TIA symptoms. Speech difficulties, and specifically dysarthria, are related to shorter delay. To reduce patient delay, awareness of TIA symptoms should increase and more importantly lay people should be educated to consider a TIA an emergency.

scholarly journals A Combined Clinical and Serum Biomarker-Based Approach May Allow Early Differentiation Between Patients With Minor Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack as Well as Mid-term Prognostication

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann Otto Pelz ◽  
Katharina Kubitz ◽  
Manja Kamprad-Lachmann ◽  
Kristian Harms ◽  
Martin Federbusch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Serum Biomarkers ◽  
Serum Biomarker ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Cerebral Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Excellent Outcome ◽  
Early Differentiation ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Background: Early differentiation between transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor ischemic stroke (MIS) impacts on the patient's individual diagnostic work-up and treatment. Furthermore, estimations regarding persisting impairments after MIS are essential to guide rehabilitation programs. This study evaluated a combined clinical- and serum biomarker-based approach for the differentiation between TIA and MIS as well as the mid-term prognostication of the functional outcome, which is applicable within the first 24 h after symptom onset.Methods: Prospectively collected data were used for a retrospective analysis including the neurological deficit at admission (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, NIHSS) and the following serum biomarkers covering different pathophysiological aspects of stroke: Coagulation (fibrinogen, antithrombin), inflammation (C reactive protein), neuronal damage in the cellular [neuron specific enolase], and the extracellular compartment [matrix metalloproteinase-9, hyaluronic acid]. Further, cerebral magnetic resonance imaging was performed at baseline and day 7, while functional outcome was evaluated with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) after 3, 6, and 12 months.Results: Based on data from 96 patients (age 64 ± 14 years), 23 TIA patients (NIHSS 0.6 ± 1.1) were compared with 73 MIS patients (NIHSS 2.4 ± 2.0). In a binary logistic regression analysis, the combination of NIHSS and serum biomarkers differentiated MIS from TIA with a sensitivity of 91.8% and a specificity of 60.9% [area under the curve (AUC) 0.84]. In patients with NIHSS 0 at admission, this panel resulted in a still acceptable sensitivity of 81.3% (specificity 71.4%, AUC 0.69) for the differentiation between MIS (n = 16) and TIA (n = 14). By adding age, remarkable sensitivities of 98.4, 100, and 98.2% for the prediction of an excellent outcome (mRS 0 or 1) were achieved with respect to time points investigated within the 1-year follow-up. However, the specificity was moderate and decreased over time (83.3, 70, 58.3%; AUC 0.96, 0.92, 0.91).Conclusion: This pilot study provides evidence that the NIHSS combined with selected serum biomarkers covering pathophysiological aspects of stroke may represent a useful tool to differentiate between MIS and TIA within 24 h after symptom onset. Further, this approach may accurately predict the mid-term outcome in minor stroke patients, which might help to allocate rehabilitative resources.

Organized Outpatient Care of Patients with Transient Ischemic Attack and Minor Stroke

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (03) ◽  
pp. 383-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Joundi ◽  
G. Saposnik
Keyword(s):  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Recurrent Stroke ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Medical Emergency ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Specialist Care ◽  
Advanced Imaging ◽  
The Past ◽  
Ischemic Attack

AbstractThe risk of recurrent stroke after transient ischemic attack (TIA) is high. In the past 10 years, TIA has increasingly been recognized as a medical emergency. Health systems have adapted toward rapid evaluation, investigation, and secondary prevention in patients with presumed TIA and minor stroke, and the significant benefits in reducing recurrent stroke and mortality have been borne out in several landmark studies. Various scores have been developed and debated to better risk stratify patients with TIA for hospitalization or urgent referral. However, scoring systems face challenges in identifying all patients with high-risk etiologies such as atrial fibrillation and carotid stenosis, and therefore require further refinement before widespread use. Further challenges include the role of advanced imaging in TIA, and ensuring rapid access to specialist care for all patients. In the absence of definitive risk stratification methods, the authors conclude that all patients with suspected TIA and minor stroke should be assessed and treated on an urgent basis, ideally through rapid outpatient referral programs.

scholarly journals Delay in patients suspected of transient ischaemic attack: a cross-sectional study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e027161 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Servaas Dolmans ◽  
L Jaap Kappelle ◽  
Marie-Louise EL Bartelink ◽  
Arno W Hoes ◽  
Frans H Rutten
Keyword(s):  
Ischaemic Stroke ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Transient Ischaemic Attack ◽  
Preventive Treatment ◽  
Patient Delay ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Ischaemic Attack ◽  
First Contact

ObjectivesSuspected transient ischaemic attack (TIA) necessitates an urgent neurological consultation and a rapid start of antiplatelet therapy to reduce the risk of early ischaemic stroke following a TIA. Guidelines for general practitioners (GPs) emphasise the urgency to install preventive treatment as soon as possible. We aimed to give a contemporary overview of both patient and physician delay.MethodsA survey at two rapid-access TIA outpatient clinics in Utrecht, the Netherlands. All patients suspected of TIA were interviewed to assess time delay to diagnosis and treatment, including the time from symptom onset to (1) the first contact with a medical service (patient delay), (2) consultation of the GP and (3) assessment at the TIA outpatient clinic. We used the diagnosis of the consulting neurologist as reference.ResultsOf 93 included patients, 43 (46.2%) received a definite, 13 (14.0%) a probable, 11 (11.8%) a possible and 26 (28.0%) no diagnosis of TIA. The median time from symptom onset to the visit to the TIA service was 114.5 (IQR 44.0–316.6) hours. Median patient delay was 17.5 (IQR 0.8–66.4) hours, with a delay of more than 24 hours in 36 (38.7%) patients. The GP was first contacted in 76 (81.7%) patients, and median time from first contact with the GP practice to the actual GP consultation was 2.8 (0.5–18.5) hours. Median time from GP consultation to TIA service visit was 40.8 (IQR 23.1–140.7) hours. Of the 62 patients naïve to antithrombotic medication who consulted their GP, 27 (43.5%) received antiplatelet therapy.ConclusionsThere is substantial patient and physician delay in the process of getting a confirmed TIA diagnosis, resulting in suboptimal prevention of an early ischaemic stroke.

scholarly journals Does Abnormal Circadian Blood Pressure Pattern Really Matter in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack or Minor Stroke?

Stroke ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 865-867 ◽  
Author(s):  
WenWen Zhang ◽  
Dominique A. Cadilhac ◽  
Leonid Churilov ◽  
Geoffrey A. Donnan ◽  
Christopher O’Callaghan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Pressure Pattern ◽  
Circadian Blood Pressure ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Abstract TP438: Japanese versus Non-Japanese Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack or Minor Stroke: Five-Year Risk of Stroke and Vascular Events

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinichiro Uchiyama ◽  
Takao Hoshino ◽  
Hugo Charles ◽  
Kenji Kamiyama ◽  
Taizen Nakase ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Stroke Recurrence ◽  
Large Artery ◽  
Vascular Events ◽  
Minor Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Background: We have reported 5-year risk of stroke and vascular events after a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor ischemic stroke in patients enrolled into the TIAregistry.org, which was an international multicenter-cooperative, prospective registry (N Engl J Med 2018;378:2182-90). We conducted subanalysis on the 5-year follow-up data of Japanese patients in comparison with non-Japanese patients. Methods: The patients were classified into two groups on ethnicity, Japanese (n=345) and non-Japanese (n=3502), and their 5-year event rates were compared. We also determined predictors of five-year stroke in both groups. Results: Death from vascular cause (0.9% vs 2.7%, HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.89, p=0.031) and death from any cause (7.8% vs 9.9%, HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.99, p=0.045) were fewer in Japanese patients than in non-Japanese patients, while stroke (13.9% vs 7.2%, HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.31-2.43, p<0.001) and intracranial hemorrhage (3.2% vs 0.8%, HR 3.61. 95% CI 1.78-7.30, p<0.001) were more common in Japanese than non-Japanese patients during five-year follow-up period. Caplan-Meyer curves at five-years showed that the rates of stroke was also significantly higher in Japanese than non-Japanese patients (log-rank test, p=0.001). Predictors for stroke recurrence at five years were large artery atherosclerosis (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.31-2.52, p<0.001), cardioembolism (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.18-2.47, p=0.004), multiple acute infarction (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.27-2.45, p<0.001) and ABCD 2 score 6 or 7 (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.38-2.78, p<0.001) in non-Japanese patients, although only large artery atherosclerosis (HR 3.28, 95% CI 1.13-9.54, p=0.029) was a predictor for stroke recurrence in Japanese patients. Conclusions: Recurrence of stroke and intracranial hemorrhage were more prevalent in Japanese than non-Japanese patients. Large artery atherosclerosis was a predictor for stroke recurrence not only in non-Japanese patients but also in Japanese patients.

scholarly journals Simultaneous Bilateral Carotid Stenting under the Circumstance of Neuroprotection Device

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.H. Lee ◽  
T.-K. Kim ◽  
S.-I. Suh ◽  
B.J. Kwon ◽  
T.H. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Carotid Stenting ◽  
Neurological Impairment ◽  
Hemodynamic Instability ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Procedure Time ◽  
Hyperperfusion Syndrome ◽  
Bilateral Carotid ◽  
Ischemic Attack ◽  
Second Procedure

In this study, in order to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of simultaneous bilateral carotid artery stenting (CAS) with the use of neuroprotection in symptomatic patients, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 27 patients (19 men, eight women; median age, 69.2 years), all of whom had been scheduled to undergo bilateral CAS in a single setting. All patients presented with severe atherosclerotic bilateral carotid stenosis (>50% for symptomatic side, >80% for asymptomatic side), exhibiting symptoms of either a cerebrovascular accident or of a transient ischemic attack on at least one side. 48 arteries were treated with self-expandable stents. Neuroprotection devices were utilized for bilateral CAS in 11 patients, and in 16 unilateral CAS patients. We did not perform the second procedure in six patients, in cases in which a patient exhibited (a) hemodynamic instability, (b) a new neurological impairment, or (c) restlessness after a prolonged time for the first CAS. The second procedure was postponed in a staged manner. We achieved a mean residual stenosis of 8.1 ± 5.0 % in the treated lesions. The mean procedural time for bilateral CAS was three hours and 18 minutes. 17 patients (63%) developed transient bradycardia during the balloon dilatation of one or both of the relevant arteries. Three patients (11%) exhibited persistent bradycardia and hypotension, which required the administration of intravenous vasopressors for several days (2!7 days). None of the patients ultimately required pacemakers, or any further therapy. Two of the patients (7%) developed transient ischemic attack during the periprocedural period, but recovered completely. One patient developed a new minor stroke after the first procedure, and the second procedure was delayed in a staged manner. We observed no periprocedural deaths, major strokes, or myocardial infarctions, nor did we detect any cases of hyperperfusion syndrome within 30 days. In summary, simultaneous bilateral CAS with neuroprotection can be performed in a single setting without increased concerns with regard to hyperperfusion syndrome, hemodynamic instability, thrombo-embolism, or procedure time, when the first CAS has been safely completed with no evidence of complications in a well-managed procedure time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document