Clot retrieval and acute stroke care

While highlighting the benefits of endovascular clot retrieval (ECR), Hwang and Gawarikar1 identified Victoria as establishing the first statewide 24/7 ECR service in Australia. We agree with the authors’ caution against focusing on a singular therapy for a few patients at the cost of delivering basic, high quality stroke care to all. As they note in the article, offering ECR requires capacity to appropriately assess patients with advanced imaging and to treat or transfer patients if ECR is indicated.1

We want to provide some background to the ECR service and the role of telemedicine for delivering evidence-based stroke care across regional Victoria, including ECR access. In Victoria, stroke telemedicine has been an important linchpin for overcoming clinical practice variation.

The Victorian Stroke Telemedicine (VST) program (www.vst.org.au), operational since 2011, is a statewide service providing 16 regional hospitals with remote access to stroke specialists 24/7.2 The first VST patient eligible for ECR was identified in May 2015, with 78 identified to date. The Victorian Government statewide ECR protocol3 was released in May 2016, with VST being pivotal in identifying and transferring suitable patients from regional areas.

Working with regional colleagues through telemedicine has led to numerous benefits,4 including capacity building and incorporating the latest evidence into local stroke protocols. So far, 1600 patients have received a VST consultation, the thrombolysis rate for ischaemic stroke under 4.5 hours is 38% (nationally, 24%),5 some hospitals have provided thrombolysis therapy for the first time, more patients are receiving thrombolysis in under 60 minutes and haemorrhagic complications rates are comparable with those of metropolitan hospitals. Moreover, VST delivers a broader neurological service: 38% of VST consultations receive a “not stroke” diagnosis.

We agree that attention to guideline adherence (ie, stroke unit access, care plans and preventive medication) is required.1 Telemedicine may improve access to both basic and specialised care, and in our experience, it provides important infrastructure to incorporate new evidence rapidly. If systems of care could be improved to support rapid uptake of evidence, then geographical boundaries may be overcome: a national acute stroke telemedicine service may be one solution. Commensurate with the need to ensure value, we are undertaking a comprehensive cost effectiveness analysis to support optimal stroke care policy and practice decisions.