Role of the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit in a Comprehensive Stroke Center: Operations for Mechanical Thrombectomy During the Pandemic
Abstract
Introduction: Standard of care for patients with acute ischemic stroke from large vessel occlusion (AISLVO) includes prompt evaluation for urgent mechanical thrombectomy (MT) at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC). During the start of the coronavirus 2019 pandemic (COVID-19), there were reports about disruption to emergency department (ED) operations and delays in management of patients with AIS-LVO. In this study we investigate the outcome and operations for patients who were transferred from different EDs to an academic CSC’s critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU), which specializes in expeditious transfer of time-sensitive disease.
Methods: This was a pre-post retrospective study using prospectively collected clinical data from our CSC’s stroke registry. Adult patientswho were transferred fromany ED to the CCRUand underwent MT were eligible. We compared time intervals in the pre-pandemic (PP) period between January 2018– February 2020, such as ED in-out and CCRU arrival-angiography, to those during the pandemic (DP) between March 2020–May 31, 2021. We used classification and regression tree (CART) analysis to identify which time intervals, besides clinical factors, were associated with good neurological outcome (90-day modified Rankin scale 0–2).
Results: We analyzed 203 patients: 135 (66.5%) in the PP group and 68 (33.5%) in the DP group. Time from ED triage to computed tomography (difference 7 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] −12 to −1, P < 0.01) for the DP group was statistically longer, but ED in-out was similar for both groups. Time from CCRU arrival to angiography (difference 9 minutes, 95% CI 4–13, P < 0.01) for the DP group was shorter. Forty-nine percent of the DP group achieved mRS ≤ 2 vs 32% for the PP group (difference −17%, 95% CI −0.32 to −0.03, P < 0.01). The CART identified initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, age, ED in-and-out time, and CCRU arrival-to-angiography time as important predictors of good outcome.
Conclusion: Overall, the care process in EDs and at this single CSC for patients requiring MT were not heavily affected by the pandemic, as certain time metrics during the pandemic were statistically shorter than pre-pandemic intervals. Time intervals such as ED in-and-out and CCRU arrival-to-angiography were important factors in achieving good neurologic outcomes. Further study is necessary to confirm our observation and improve operational efficiency in the future.