Stroke ranks second behind heart disease as the leading cause of mortality worldwide, accounting for 1 of every 19 deaths,1 and remains a serious cause of morbidity. Best practices in stroke diagnosis and management can seem elusive to front-line clinicians, for 2 reasons: the rate of proliferation and nuance in stroke medicine and the fact that the typical scope of primary care practice exists apart from much of the diagnostic tools and management schema provided in stroke centers.2 In this article, we describe and update the diagnosis of stroke and review imaging modalities, their nuances, and their application in practice.
Diagnosis of acute stroke
Acute stroke is diagnosed upon observation of new neurologic deficits and congruent neuroimaging. Some updated definitions favor a silent form of cerebral ischemia manifested by imaging pathology only; this form is not discussed in this article. Although there are several characteristically distinct stroke syndromes, there is no way to clinically distinguish ischemic pathology from hemorrhagic pathology.
Some common symptoms that should prompt evaluation for stroke are part of the American Stroke Association FAST mnemonic designed to promote public health awareness3-5:
- face drooping
- arm weakness
- speech difficulty
- time to call 911.
Other commonly reported stroke symptoms include unilateral weakness or numbness, confusion, word-finding difficulty, visual problems, difficulty ambulating, dizziness, loss of balance or coordination, and thunderclap headache. A stroke should also be considered in the presence of any new focal neurologic deficit.3,4
Stroke patients should be triaged by emergency medical services using a stroke screening scale, such as BE-FAST5 (a modification of FAST that adds balance and eye assessments); the Los Angeles Prehospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS)6,7; the Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation (RACE)8; and the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Severity Scale (CP-SSS)9,10 (see “Stroke screening scales for early identification and triage"). Studies have not found that any single prehospital stroke scale is superior to the others for reliably predicting large-vessel occlusion; therefore, prehospital assessment is typically based on practice patterns in a given locale.11 A patient (or family member or caregiver) who seeks your care for stroke symptoms should be told to call 911 and get emergency transport to a health care facility that can capably administer intravenous (IV) thrombolysis.a
SIDEBAR
Stroke screening scales for early identification and triage
National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale
www.stroke.nih.gov/resources/scale.htm
FAST
www.stroke.org/en/help-and-support/resource-library/fast-materials
BE-FAST
www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015169
Los Angeles Prehospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS)
http://stroke.ucla.edu/workfiles/prehospital-screen.pdf
Rapid Artery Occlusion Evaluation (RACE)
www.mdcalc.com/rapid-arterial-occlusion-evaluation-race-scale-stroke
Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Severity Scale (CP-SSS)
https://www.mdcalc.com/cincinnati-prehospital-stroke-severity-scale-cp-sss
First responders should elicit “last-known-normal” time; this critical information can aid in diagnosis and drive therapeutic options, especially if patients are unaccompanied at time of transport to a higher echelon of care. A point-of-care blood glucose test should be performed by emergency medical staff, with dextrose administered for a level < 45 mg/dL. Establishing IV access for fluids, medications, and contrast can be considered if it does not delay transport. A 12-lead electrocardiogram can also be considered, again, as long as it does not delay transport to a facility capable of providing definitive therapy. Notification by emergency services staff before arrival and transport of the patient to such a facility is the essential element of prehospital care, and should be prioritized above ancillary testing beyond the stroke assessment.14
Guidelines recommend use of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS; www.stroke.nih.gov/resources/scale.htm) for clinical evaluation upon arrival at the ED.15 Although no scale has been identified that can reliably predict large-vessel occlusion amenable to endovascular therapy (EVT), no other score has been found to outperform the NIHSS in achieving meaningful patient outcomes.16 Furthermore, NIHSS has been validated to track clinical changes in response to therapy, is widely utilized, and is free.
Continue to: A criticism of the NIHSS...