4.4 Article

Delay in Diagnosis of Basilar Artery Stroke

Journal

NEUROCRITICAL CARE
Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages 172-179

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-015-0211-0

Keywords

Stroke; Basilar artery; Diagnosis; Delay; Timing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Basilar artery stroke causes substantial morbidity and mortality. Although its unusual clinical presentation potentially contributes to a delay in diagnosis, this problem has not been systematically studied. We compared intervals between symptom onset, initial presentation, and diagnosis in stroke due to basilar artery (BA) versus left middle cerebral artery (LMCA) occlusion to determine the presence of and potential reasons for diagnostic delay in BA stroke. Methods We retrospectively identified 21 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with BA stroke between 2009 and 2011 from our hospital's prospective stroke registry. Patients were age-, sex-, and race-matched with 21 LMCA stroke patients from the same period. All subjects had confirmed clinical and radiographic diagnosis of stroke due to occlusion or stenosis of the BA, LMCA, or left internal carotid artery. Time to diagnosis was determined independently by two investigators through medical record review. The pre-specified primary outcome was latency from emergency department (ED) arrival to stroke diagnosis. Results Median time from ED arrival to diagnosis was 8 h 24 min (IQR: 2:43-26:32) for BA and 1 h 23 min (IQR: 0:41-1:45; p < 0.001) for LMCA. Median time from symptom onset to ED arrival was 7 h 44 min (IQR 1:23-21:30) for BA and 1 h 2 min (IQR 0:36-9:41; p = 0.06) for LMCA. Four of 21 (19 %) BA patients were diagnosed within a 4-h time frame to make intravenous thrombolysis possible compared to 13 of 21 (62 %) LMCA patients (p = 0.01). Conclusions Our results suggest that both pre-hospital and in-hospital processes cause substantial, clinically significant delays in the diagnosis of BA stroke.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available