AbstractBackground and Purpose—
Endovascular recanalization treatment for acute ischemic stroke is a complex, time-sensitive intervention. Trip-and-treat is an interhospital service delivery model that has not previously been evaluated in the literature and consists of a shared mobile interventional stroke team that travels to primary stroke centers to provide on-site interventional capability. We compared treatment times between the trip-and-treat model and the traditional drip-and-ship model.Methods—
We performed a retrospective analysis on 86 consecutive eligible patients with acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion who received endovascular treatment at 4 hospitals in Manhattan. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: trip-and-treat (n=39) and drip-and-ship (n=47). The primary outcome was initial door-to-puncture time, defined as the time between arrival at any hospital and arterial puncture. We also recorded and analyzed the times of last known well, IV-tPA (intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator) administration, transfer, and reperfusion.Results—
Mean initial door-to-puncture time was 143 minutes for trip-and-treat and 222 minutes for drip-and-ship (P<0.0001). Although there was a trend in longer puncture-to-recanalization times for trip-and-treat (P=0.0887), initial door-to-recanalization was nonetheless 79 minutes faster for trip-and-treat (P<0.0001). There was a trend in improved admission-to-discharge change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale for trip-and-treat compared with drip-and-ship (P=0.0704).Conclusions—
Compared with drip-and-ship, the trip-and-treat model demonstrated shorter treatment times for endovascular therapy in our series. The trip-and-treat model offers a valid alternative to current interhospital stroke transfers in urban environments.