The effectiveness of thrombolysis is highly time dependent. For this reason, short target times have been set to reduce time to treatment from hospital arrival, which is called door-to-needle time.
Summary of review
There has been considerable work done at single centers and across multiple hospitals to improve door-to-needle time. There have been reductions of 8 to 47 min when applying one or more improvement strategies at single centers, and there have been many multi-hospital initiatives. The delays to treatment have been attributed to both patient and hospital factors, and strategies to address these delays have been proven to reduce door-to-needle time. The most effective strategies include pre-notification of arrival by Emergency Medical Services (EMS), single-call activation of stroke team, rapid registration process, moving the patient to computed tomography on EMS stretcher, and administration of alteplase in the scanner. There are many exciting areas of future direction including reduction of door-to-needle time in developing countries, improving pre-hospital response times, and improving the efficiency of endovascular treatment.
Conclusions
There is now a broad understanding of the causes of delays to fast treatment and the strategies that can be employed to improve door-to-needle time such that most centers could achieve median door-to-needle time of 30 min.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. New Engl J Med1995; 333: 1581–1587.
2.
The ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA Study Group Investigators. Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials. Lancet2004; 363: 768–774.
3.
SaverJL. Time is brain—quantified. Stroke2006; 37: 263–266.
4.
GomezCR. Time is brain. J Stroke Crebrovasc Dis1993; 3: 1–2.
5.
EmbersonJLeesKRLydenPet al.Effect of treatment delay, age, and stroke severity on the effects of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet2014; 384: 1929–1935.
6.
EvensonKRForakerREMorrisDLet al.A comprehensive review of prehospital and in‐hospital delay times in acute stroke care. Int J Stroke2009; 4: 187–199.
7.
FassbenderKBalucaniCWalterSet al.Streamlining of prehospital stroke management: the golden hour. Lancet Neurol2013; 12: 585–596.
8.
Ragoschke‐SchummAWalterSHaassAet al.Translation of the ‘time is brain’ concept into clinical practice: focus on prehospital stroke management. Int J Stroke2014; 9: 333–340.
9.
AlbertsMJLatchawREJagodaAet al.Revised and updated recommendations for the establishment of primary stroke centers: A summary statement from the brain attack coalition. Stroke2011; 42: 2651–2665.
10.
MarlerJRWinters JonesPet al.The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: Proceedings of national symposium on rapid identification and treatment of acute stroke, Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 1997.
MeretojaAStrbianDMustanojaSet al.Reducing in-hospital delay to 20 minutes in stroke thrombolysis. Neurology2012; 79: 306–313.
17.
MeretojaAWeirLUgaldeMet al.Helsinki model cut stroke thrombolysis delays to 25 minutes in Melbourne in only 4 months. Neurology2013; 81: 1071–1076.
18.
WahlgrenNAhmedNDávalosAet al.Thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST): an observational study. Lancet2007; 369: 275–282.
19.
ThortveitETBøeMGLjøstadUet al.Organizational changes aiming to reduce iv tPA door-to-needle time. Acta Neurol Scand2014; 130: 248–252.
20.
FonarowGCReevesMJSmithEEet al.Characteristics, performance measures, and in-hospital outcomes of the first one million stroke and transient ischemic attack admissions in get with the guidelines-stroke. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes2010; 3: 291–302.
21.
AhmedNWahlgrenNGrondMet al.Implementation and outcome of thrombolysis with alteplase 3–4·5 h after an acute stroke: an updated analysis from SITS-ISTR. Lancet Neurol2010; 9: 866–874.
22.
FordALWilliamsJASpencerMet al.Reducing door-to-needle times using Toyota’s lean manufacturing principles and value stream analysis. Stroke2012; 43: 3395–3398.
23.
KimSKLeeSYBaeHJet al.Pre‐hospital notification reduced the door‐to‐needle time for IV t‐PA in acute ischaemic stroke. Eur J Neurol2009; 16: 1331–1335.
24.
MehdirattaMWoolfendenARChapmanKMet al.Reduction in IV t-PA door to needle times using an Acute Stroke Triage Pathway. Can J Neurol Sci2006; 33: 214–216.
25.
FonarowGCZhaoXSmithEEet al.Door-to-needle times for tissue plasminogen activator administration and clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke before and after a quality improvement initiative. JAMA2014; 311: 1632–1640.
26.
WalterSKostopoulosPHaassAet al.Point‐of‐care laboratory halves door‐to‐therapy‐decision time in acute stroke. Ann Neurol2011; 69: 581–586.
27.
CasollaBBodenantMGirotMet al.Intra-hospital delays in stroke patients treated with rt-PA: impact of preadmission notification. J Neurol2013; 260: 635–639.
28.
ZinkstokSMBeenenLFLuitseJSet al.Thrombolysis in stroke within 30 minutes: Results of the acute brain care intervention study. PloS One2016; 11: e0166668.
29.
TaiYJWeirLHandPet al.Does a ‘code stroke’ rapid access protocol decrease door‐to‐needle time for thrombolysis?Int Med J2012; 42: 1316–1324.
30.
Van SchaikSMVan der VeenBVan den Berg-VosRMet al.Achieving a door-to-needle time of 25 minutes in thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a quality improvement project. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2014; 23: 2900–2906.
31.
RuffIMAliSFGoldsteinJNet al.Improving door-to-needle times: A Single Center Validation of the Target Stroke Hypothesis. Stroke2014; 45: 504–508.
HeoJHKimYDNamHSet al.A computerized in-hospital alert system for thrombolysis in acute stroke. Stroke2010; 41: 1978–1983.
34.
BarberPAZhangJDemchukAMet al.Why are stroke patients excluded from TPA therapy? An analysis of patient eligibility. Neurology2001; 56: 1015–1020.
35.
KamalNHolodinskyJKStephensonCet al.Improving door-to-needle times for acute ischemic stroke: Effect of rapid patient registration, moving directly to computed tomography, and giving alteplase at the computed tomography scanner. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes2017; 10: e003242.
36.
BusbyLOwadaKDhunganaSet al.CODE FAST: a quality improvement initiative to reduce door-to-needle times. J Neurointerv Surg2016; 8: 661–664.
37.
StrbianDAhmedNWahlgrenNet al.Trends in door-to-thrombolysis time in the safe implementation of stroke thrombolysis registry. Stroke2015; 46: 1275–1280.
38.
MikulikRCasoVWahlgrenN. Past and future of stroke care in Europe. Oruen –CNS J2017; 2: 19–26.
39.
AsplundKGladerELNorrvingBet al.Effects of extending the time window of thrombolysis to 4.5 hours: Observations in the Swedish stroke register (Riks-Stroke). Stroke2011; 42: 2492–2497.
40.
ChoiPDesaiJAKashyapDet al.Are all stroke patients eligible for fast alteplase treatment? An analysis of unavoidable delays. Acad Emerg Med2016; 23: 393–399.
41.
FonarowGCSmithEESaverJLet al.Timeliness of tissue-type plasminogen activator therapy in acute ischemic stroke. Circulation2011; 123: 750–758.
42.
MikulíkRKadlecováPCzlonkowskaAet al.Factors influencing in-hospital delay in treatment with intravenous thrombolysis. Stroke2012; 43: 1578–1583.
43.
RostanskiSKShahnZElkindMSet al.Door-to-needle delays in minor stroke: A causal inference approach. Stroke2017; 48: 1980–1982.
44.
KamalNShengSXianYet al.Delays in Door-to-Needle Times and their impact on treatment time and outcomes in get with the Guidelines-Stroke. Stroke2017; 48: 946–954.
45.
Durai PandianJPadmaVVijayaPet al.Stroke and thrombolysis in developing countries. Int J Stroke2007; 2: 17–26.
46.
OzarkSDEdwardCJ. Putting it all together for best stroke practice, all the time. Stroke2014; 45: 1243–1244.
47.
XianYXuHLytleBet al.Use of strategies to improve Door-to-Needle Times with Tissue-Type Plasminogen activator in acute ischemic stroke in clinical practice. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes2017; 10: e003227.
48.
FerrariJKnoflachMKiechlSet al.Stroke thrombolysis: having more time translates into delayed therapy. Stroke2010; 41: 2001–2004.
49.
RomanoJGMullerNMerinoJGFortezaAMKochSRabinsteinAA. In-hospital delays to stroke thrombolysis: paradoxical effect of early arrival. Neurol Res2007; 29: 664–666.
50.
TilleyBCLydenPDBrottTGet al.Total quality improvement method for reduction of delays between emergency department admission and treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Arch Neurol1997; 54: 1466–1474.
51.
XianYSmithEEZhaoXet al.Strategies used by hospitals to improve speed of tissue-type plasminogen activator treatment in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke2014; 45: 1387–1395.
52.
MendelsonSJPrabhakaranS. Pace of progress in stroke thrombolysis: Are hospitals running to stand still. Circulation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes2017; 10: e003438.
53.
KhuranaDDasBKumarAet al.Temporal trends in intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke: Experience from a tertiary care center in India. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2017; 26: 1266–1273.
54.
WalterSKostopoulosPHaassAet al.Diagnosis and treatment of patients with stroke in a mobile stroke unit versus in hospital: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol2012; 11: 397–404.
55.
KrishnamurthiRVFeiginVLForouzanfarMHet al.Global and regional burden of first-ever ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke during 1990–2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet Glob Health2013; 1: e259–e281.
56.
PoungvarinN. Stroke in the developing world. Lancet1998; 352: S19–S22.
57.
Sadeghi-HokmabadiETaheraghdamAHashemilarMet al.Simple in-hospital interventions to reduce door-to-CT time in acute stroke. Int J Vasc Med2016; 2016: 1656212.
58.
EbingerMWinterBWendtMet al.Effect of the use of ambulance-based thrombolysis on time to thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA2014; 311: 1622–1631.
59.
GoyalMMenonBKVan ZwamWHet al.Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet2016; 387: 1723–1731.
60.
SaverJLGoyalMVan der LugtAAet al.Time to treatment with endovascular thrombectomy and outcomes from ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis. JAMA2016; 316: 1279–1288.
61.
MenonBKSajobiTTZhangYet al.Analysis of workflow and time to treatment on thrombectomy outcome in the endovascular treatment for small core and proximal occlusion ischemic stroke (ESCAPE) randomized, controlled trial. Circulation2016; 133: 2279–2286.
62.
DemchukAMGoyalMMenonBKet al.Endovascular treatment for Small Core and Anterior circulation Proximal occlusion with Emphasis on minimizing CT to recanalization times (ESCAPE) trial: methodology. Int J Stroke2015; 10: 429–438.
63.
KamalNSmithEEMenonBKet al.Improving reperfusion time within the ESCAPE Endovascular Clinical Trial. Eur Stroke J2017; 2: 64–69.
64.
McTaggartRAAnsariSAGoyalMet al.Initial hospital management of patients with emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO): report of the standards and guidelines committee of the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery. J Neurointerv Surg2017; 9: 316–323.
65.
SmithEESchwammLH. Endovascular clot retrieval therapy: implications for the organization of stroke systems of care in North America. Stroke2015; 46: 1462–1467.
