Acute Stroke Management — Part 1: Prehospital Recognition, ED Evaluation & Neuroimaging
Stroke types, prehospital stroke scales (CPSS, LAMS, RACE, FAST-ED), complete NIHSS scoring, focused history, laboratory evaluation, and neuroimaging (NCCT, CTA, CTP, MRI/DWI, ASPECTS).
1. Stroke Classification and Pathophysiology
1.1 Ischemic Stroke (87% of All Strokes)
Ischemic stroke results from occlusion of a cerebral artery, leading to focal brain ischemia and infarction. The ischemic penumbra — tissue surrounding the infarct core that is hypoperfused but potentially salvageable — forms the basis for all acute reperfusion therapies.1
Subtypes by Mechanism (TOAST Classification)
| Subtype | Mechanism | Proportion | Key Features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Large artery atherosclerosis | Atherothrombosis or artery-to-artery embolism from extracranial or intracranial large vessels | ~25% | Carotid stenosis, intracranial atherosclerosis; cortical or large subcortical infarcts |
| Cardioembolism | Embolism from cardiac source (atrial fibrillation, valvular disease, LV thrombus, PFO) | ~25% | Atrial fibrillation is most common source; multiple vascular territory infarcts suggest cardioembolism |
| Small vessel occlusion (lacunar) | Lipohyalinosis or microatheroma of penetrating arterioles | ~20% | Subcortical infarcts < 1.5 cm; classic lacunar syndromes (pure motor, pure sensory, ataxic hemiparesis, dysarthria-clumsy hand, sensorimotor) |
| Other determined etiology | Dissection, vasculitis, hypercoagulable states, sickle cell disease, moyamoya | ~5% | Younger patients; consider in stroke without traditional risk factors |
| Cryptogenic / ESUS | No identifiable mechanism after thorough evaluation | ~25% | Embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS); prolonged cardiac monitoring often reveals paroxysmal AF |
Large Vessel Occlusion (LVO)
Large vessel occlusions account for approximately 25-40% of acute ischemic strokes and produce the most devastating outcomes. LVO is defined as occlusion of the intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA), proximal middle cerebral artery (M1 or proximal M2 segment), or basilar artery. Identification of LVO is critical because these patients are candidates for endovascular thrombectomy.2
1.2 Hemorrhagic Stroke
Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ICH) — 10% of All Strokes
Spontaneous (non-traumatic) bleeding into the brain parenchyma, most commonly caused by hypertensive arteriopathy (affecting deep perforating arteries) or cerebral amyloid angiopathy (affecting cortical and leptomeningeal vessels). ICH carries a 30-day mortality of 30-50% and accounts for a disproportionate share of stroke-related disability.3
| ICH Location | Common Etiology | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Basal ganglia (putamen) | Hypertensive arteriopathy | ~35% |
| Thalamus | Hypertensive arteriopathy | ~15% |
| Lobar (cortical/subcortical) | Cerebral amyloid angiopathy, AVM, tumor | ~30% |
| Cerebellum | Hypertensive arteriopathy | ~10% |
| Pons/brainstem | Hypertensive arteriopathy | ~10% |
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH) — 3% of All Strokes
Bleeding into the subarachnoid space, most commonly from rupture of an intracranial saccular aneurysm (~85%). Presents with sudden-onset severe headache (“thunderclap headache”) with or without focal neurological deficits. SAH carries an overall mortality of approximately 25-50%, with an additional 30% of survivors experiencing significant morbidity.4
1.3 Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA)
TIA is defined as a transient episode of neurological dysfunction caused by focal brain, spinal cord, or retinal ischemia, without acute infarction on imaging. The tissue-based definition (absence of infarction on diffusion-weighted MRI) has replaced the older time-based definition (symptoms lasting < 24 hours). Approximately 10-15% of patients with TIA will have a stroke within 90 days, with the highest risk in the first 48 hours.5
2. Prehospital Recognition and Stroke Scales
2.1 EMS Activation and Stroke System of Care
Prehospital recognition of stroke is the critical first link in the chain of acute stroke care. The major professional societies recommend:1 6
- Public education campaigns emphasizing stroke warning signs
- 9-1-1 activation for any suspected stroke symptom
- EMS dispatch protocols that prioritize stroke calls
- Prehospital stroke screening using validated scales
- Prehospital notification of the receiving stroke center
- Transport to the highest-level stroke center within a reasonable transport time
- Goal: EMS scene time < 15 minutes for suspected stroke
2.2 Prehospital Stroke Screening Scales
Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS)
The most widely used prehospital screening tool. Assesses three items; any single abnormality has a sensitivity of approximately 66-80% and specificity of 85-90% for stroke.7
| Item | Normal | Abnormal |
|---|---|---|
| Facial droop | Both sides of face move equally when patient smiles | One side of face does not move as well as the other |
| Arm drift | Both arms move equally or not at all (eyes closed, arms extended 10 seconds) | One arm drifts downward compared to the other |
| Speech | Patient uses correct words with no slurring | Slurred or inappropriate words or unable to speak |
Interpretation: Any single abnormality = positive screen → activate stroke protocol.
Los Angeles Motor Scale (LAMS)
A brief motor examination tool validated for identifying both stroke and LVO in the prehospital setting.8
| Item | Scoring |
|---|---|
| Facial droop | 0 = Absent; 1 = Present |
| Arm drift | 0 = Absent; 1 = Drifts down; 2 = Falls rapidly |
| Grip strength | 0 = Normal; 1 = Weak grip; 2 = No grip |
Total score: 0-5
| LAMS Score | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| ≥ 1 | Positive screen for stroke |
| ≥ 4 | High probability of LVO (sensitivity ~76%, specificity ~65%) |
Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation (RACE) Scale
A more comprehensive prehospital scale designed specifically to identify LVO candidates for direct transport to endovascular-capable centers.9
| Item | Scoring |
|---|---|
| Facial palsy | 0 = Absent; 1 = Mild; 2 = Moderate-severe |
| Arm motor function | 0 = Normal/mild; 1 = Moderate; 2 = Severe |
| Leg motor function | 0 = Normal/mild; 1 = Moderate; 2 = Severe |
| Head/gaze deviation | 0 = Absent; 1 = Present |
| Aphasia (dominant hemisphere) / Agnosia (non-dominant) | 0 = Performs both tasks correctly; 1 = Performs one correctly; 2 = Performs neither correctly |
Total score: 0-9
| RACE Score | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| ≥ 5 | High probability of LVO (sensitivity ~85%, specificity ~68%) |
Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED)
| Item | Scoring |
|---|---|
| Facial palsy | 0 = Normal; 1 = Minor; 2 = Partial/complete |
| Arm weakness | 0 = None; 1 = Drift; 2 = Some/no effort against gravity |
| Speech changes | 0 = Normal; 1 = Mild-moderate; 2 = Severe/global/mute |
| Eye deviation | 0 = Absent; 2 = Present |
| Denial/neglect | 0 = Absent; 2 = Present |
Total score: 0-10. Score ≥ 4 suggests LVO (sensitivity ~60%, specificity ~90%).10
Vision, Aphasia, Neglect (VAN) Assessment
A cortical function screen designed to detect LVO by identifying cortical signs rather than motor deficits alone. The VAN assessment is performed only if a basic motor screen (face, arm, speech) is positive.11
| Step | Assessment |
|---|---|
| V — Visual disturbance | Field cut (confrontation testing) or double simultaneous extinction |
| A — Aphasia | Difficulty speaking or understanding (ask patient to describe scene, follow commands) |
| N — Neglect | Forced gaze deviation, inability to feel both sides simultaneously, or lack of awareness of one side |
Interpretation: Positive motor screen + any VAN positive = high probability of LVO → consider direct transport to comprehensive stroke center.
2.3 Prehospital LVO Triage — Scale Comparison
| Scale | Items | Score Range | LVO Threshold | Sensitivity for LVO | Specificity for LVO | Time to Complete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPSS | 3 | 0-3 | Any abnormality (stroke only) | N/A (stroke screen) | N/A (stroke screen) | < 1 min |
| LAMS | 3 | 0-5 | ≥ 4 | ~76% | ~65% | < 1 min |
| RACE | 5 | 0-9 | ≥ 5 | ~85% | ~68% | 1-2 min |
| FAST-ED | 5 | 0-10 | ≥ 4 | ~60% | ~90% | 1-2 min |
| VAN | 3 cortical | Binary | Any positive | ~100% | ~90% | 2-3 min |
3. Emergency Department Evaluation
3.1 Time Targets
The fundamental principle of acute stroke care is minimizing time from symptom onset to definitive treatment. The following benchmarks are recommended by the major stroke and cardiovascular professional societies:1 6
| Metric | Target |
|---|---|
| Door-to-physician evaluation | ≤ 10 minutes |
| Door-to-stroke team notification | ≤ 15 minutes |
| Door-to-CT initiation | ≤ 20 minutes |
| Door-to-CT interpretation | ≤ 45 minutes |
| Door-to-needle (IV thrombolysis) | ≤ 60 minutes (goal ≤ 45 minutes) |
| Door-to-groin puncture (EVT) | ≤ 90 minutes (from arrival at EVT-capable center) |
| Onset-to-reperfusion (EVT) | ≤ 6 hours (standard window) |
3.2 Initial Assessment
Airway, Breathing, Circulation
- Assess airway patency; intubate if GCS ≤ 8 or inability to protect airway
- Monitor oxygen saturation; supplemental O2 if SpO2 < 94%
- Do NOT administer supplemental oxygen if SpO2 ≥ 94% (no benefit, potential harm)1
- Establish IV access; avoid dextrose-containing fluids (hyperglycemia worsens outcomes)
- Cardiac monitoring — stroke and cardiac events share risk factors; acute MI and arrhythmias can coexist with or cause stroke
Focused History — “LAST KNOWN WELL” is Critical
The last known well (LKW) time is the single most important historical data point, as it determines eligibility for time-based reperfusion therapies. LKW is defined as the last time the patient was observed at their neurological baseline — NOT the time symptoms were discovered.1
| History Element | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Last known well time | Determines thrombolysis/thrombectomy eligibility |
| Symptom onset and progression | Acute vs. progressive; stuttering symptoms suggest TIA or crescendo TIA |
| Anticoagulant/antiplatelet use | Affects thrombolysis eligibility and hemorrhage risk; specific agent and last dose |
| Recent surgery or trauma | Contraindication to thrombolysis (within 14-21 days) |
| History of intracranial hemorrhage | Relative contraindication to thrombolysis |
| Seizure at onset | Consider Todd paralysis as mimic; does not exclude thrombolysis if deficit clearly ischemic |
| Baseline functional status | mRS score; affects treatment decisions in extended windows |
| Head trauma or stroke in past 3 months | Contraindication to thrombolysis |
| GI or GU hemorrhage in past 21 days | Contraindication to thrombolysis |
| Arterial puncture at non-compressible site in past 7 days | Contraindication to thrombolysis |
| Pregnancy | Relative contraindication; risk-benefit analysis |
3.3 Laboratory Evaluation
Only blood glucose is required before initiating IV thrombolysis. Other labs should be drawn but should NOT delay treatment unless there is clinical suspicion of a specific abnormality.1
| Test | Rationale | Must Result Before tPA? |
|---|---|---|
| Blood glucose (point-of-care) | Hypoglycemia is a stroke mimic; hyperglycemia worsens outcomes | YES — only required pre-treatment test |
| CBC with platelets | Thrombocytopenia (< 100,000) is a contraindication to thrombolysis | Only if clinical suspicion of thrombocytopenia |
| PT/INR | Elevated INR (> 1.7) is a contraindication to thrombolysis | Only if patient is on warfarin or suspected coagulopathy |
| aPTT | Elevated aPTT is a contraindication if on heparin | Only if patient is on heparin |
| Troponin | Acute MI may coexist with or cause stroke | No — send but do not wait |
| Basic metabolic panel | Electrolyte abnormalities; renal function for CTA contrast | No — send but do not wait |
| Type and screen | Preparation for possible surgical intervention or transfusion | No — send but do not wait |
4. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) — Complete Reference
The NIHSS is a 15-item neurological examination scale that provides a quantitative measure of stroke-related neurological deficit. It is the standard tool for assessing stroke severity, determining treatment eligibility, and monitoring neurological status over time. The scale is performed by trained clinicians and takes approximately 5-8 minutes to complete.12
4.1 General Scoring Rules
- Score what the patient does, not what you think they can do
- Score the first response, not the best response (except where noted)
- Do not coach the patient
- Record each item independently — do not allow knowledge of one item’s result to influence another
- Score items in the order listed
- For items where left/right is tested, score the worse side unless otherwise specified
- A total NIHSS score of 0 indicates no measurable deficit; maximum score is 42
4.2 Complete NIHSS Scoring Table
| Item | Assessment | Score | Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1a. Level of Consciousness (LOC) | Alertness | 0 | Alert; keenly responsive |
| 1 | Not alert; arousable by minor stimulation | ||
| 2 | Not alert; requires repeated stimulation to attend, or obtunded requiring strong or painful stimulation | ||
| 3 | Responds only with reflex motor or autonomic effects, or totally unresponsive, flaccid, areflexic | ||
| 1b. LOC Questions | Ask patient their age and the current month | 0 | Answers both questions correctly |
| 1 | Answers one question correctly | ||
| 2 | Answers neither question correctly | ||
| 1c. LOC Commands | Ask patient to open/close eyes and grip/release non-paretic hand | 0 | Performs both tasks correctly |
| 1 | Performs one task correctly | ||
| 2 | Performs neither task correctly | ||
| 2. Best Gaze | Test horizontal eye movements only (voluntary or reflexive) | 0 | Normal |
| 1 | Partial gaze palsy; abnormal gaze in one or both eyes but forced deviation or total gaze paresis is not present | ||
| 2 | Forced deviation or total gaze paresis not overcome by oculocephalic maneuver | ||
| 3. Visual Fields | Confrontation visual field testing (all 4 quadrants tested by finger counting or visual threat) | 0 | No visual loss |
| 1 | Partial hemianopia | ||
| 2 | Complete hemianopia | ||
| 3 | Bilateral hemianopia (blind, including cortical blindness) | ||
| 4. Facial Palsy | Ask patient to show teeth, raise eyebrows, close eyes tightly | 0 | Normal symmetrical movements |
| 1 | Minor paralysis (flattened nasolabial fold, asymmetry on smiling) | ||
| 2 | Partial paralysis (total or near-total lower face paralysis) | ||
| 3 | Complete paralysis of one or both sides (absence of facial movement in upper and lower face) | ||
| 5a. Left Arm Motor | Arm extended 90° (sitting) or 45° (supine) for 10 seconds | 0 | No drift; arm holds position for full 10 seconds |
| 1 | Drift; arm holds position but drifts before full 10 seconds; does not hit bed | ||
| 2 | Some effort against gravity; arm cannot maintain 90° (or 45°) but has some effort against gravity | ||
| 3 | No effort against gravity; arm falls | ||
| 4 | No movement | ||
| UN | Amputation or joint fusion — explain | ||
| 5b. Right Arm Motor | Same as 5a for the right arm | 0-4, UN | Same criteria as 5a |
| 6a. Left Leg Motor | Leg extended 30° (supine) for 5 seconds | 0 | No drift; leg holds position for full 5 seconds |
| 1 | Drift; leg falls by end of 5-second period but does not hit bed | ||
| 2 | Some effort against gravity; leg falls to bed within 5 seconds but has some effort against gravity | ||
| 3 | No effort against gravity; leg falls to bed immediately | ||
| 4 | No movement | ||
| UN | Amputation or joint fusion — explain | ||
| 6b. Right Leg Motor | Same as 6a for the right leg | 0-4, UN | Same criteria as 6a |
| 7. Limb Ataxia | Finger-nose-finger and heel-shin tests on both sides | 0 | Absent |
| 1 | Present in one limb | ||
| 2 | Present in two or more limbs | ||
| UN | Amputation or joint fusion — explain | ||
| 8. Sensory | Pin-prick or withdrawal from noxious stimulus; test face, arm, trunk, leg on both sides | 0 | Normal; no sensory loss |
| 1 | Mild-to-moderate sensory loss; patient feels pinprick is less sharp or is dull on the affected side, or loss of superficial pain with pinprick but patient is aware of being touched | ||
| 2 | Severe or total sensory loss; patient is not aware of being touched on the face, arm, and leg | ||
| 9. Best Language | Assessed during entire examination — name items on a picture card, describe a picture scene, read a list of sentences | 0 | No aphasia; normal |
| 1 | Mild-to-moderate aphasia; some obvious loss of fluency or comprehension without significant limitation on ideas expressed or form of expression | ||
| 2 | Severe aphasia; all communication is through fragmentary expression; great need for inference, questioning, and guessing by the listener; limited range of information exchanged | ||
| 3 | Mute, global aphasia; no usable speech or auditory comprehension | ||
| 10. Dysarthria | Read or repeat a list of words | 0 | Normal |
| 1 | Mild-to-moderate dysarthria; patient slurs at least some words and can be understood with some difficulty | ||
| 2 | Severe; patient’s speech so slurred as to be unintelligible in the absence of or out of proportion to any aphasia, or patient is mute/anarthric | ||
| UN | Intubated or other physical barrier — explain | ||
| 11. Extinction and Inattention (Neglect) | Simultaneous visual and tactile bilateral stimulation | 0 | No abnormality |
| 1 | Visual, tactile, auditory, spatial, or personal inattention or extinction to bilateral simultaneous stimulation in one of the sensory modalities | ||
| 2 | Profound hemi-inattention or extinction to more than one modality; does not recognize own hand or orients to only one side of space |
4.3 NIHSS Score Interpretation
| NIHSS Score | Stroke Severity | Clinical Correlation |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No stroke symptoms | Consider TIA if symptoms resolved; MRI/DWI may show infarct |
| 1-4 | Minor stroke | May be candidates for thrombolysis; low likelihood of LVO |
| 5-15 | Moderate stroke | Strong candidates for thrombolysis; evaluate for LVO if NIHSS ≥ 6 |
| 16-20 | Moderate-severe stroke | High likelihood of LVO; thrombolysis + thrombectomy |
| 21-42 | Severe stroke | Very high likelihood of LVO; evaluate for large-territory infarct; consider treatment futility if large established infarct |
4.4 Important NIHSS Caveats
- The NIHSS is heavily weighted toward anterior (carotid) circulation deficits, particularly left hemisphere (language items contribute significantly to total score)
- Posterior circulation strokes (basilar artery occlusion, cerebellar stroke) may present with low NIHSS scores despite devastating pathology — vertigo, ataxia, diplopia, and dysphagia are poorly captured
- A “minor stroke” by NIHSS (score 1-4) may still be disabling if the deficit involves the dominant hand, speech, or gait
- NIHSS can fluctuate — serial examinations are essential; a worsening NIHSS of ≥ 4 points suggests clinical deterioration
- An NIHSS of 0 at presentation does not exclude acute ischemic stroke; approximately 10-15% of patients with acute infarction on DWI have an NIHSS of 0
5. Neuroimaging
5.1 Non-Contrast CT (NCCT) — The First-Line Study
Non-contrast CT of the head is the essential first imaging study in all patients with suspected acute stroke. Its primary role is to exclude hemorrhage and identify other stroke mimics (mass lesion, subdural hematoma). NCCT is rapid, widely available, and has near-100% sensitivity for acute hemorrhage.1 13
NCCT Findings in Acute Ischemic Stroke
| Finding | Description | Timing | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | No visible abnormality | First 6-12 hours (often) | Does NOT exclude ischemic stroke; proceed with thrombolysis if clinically indicated |
| Hyperdense vessel sign | Hyperdense MCA (or basilar) — direct visualization of thrombus | Within minutes | Suggests LVO; correlates with CTA findings |
| Loss of gray-white differentiation | Subtle loss of distinction between cortical gray matter and underlying white matter | 3-6 hours | Early ischemic change; insular ribbon sign (loss of insular cortex gray-white differentiation) |
| Sulcal effacement | Effacement of cortical sulci due to cytotoxic edema | 3-6 hours | Early ischemic change |
| Hypoattenuation | Frank hypodensity (dark area) in vascular territory | > 6 hours typically | Established infarction; if involving > 1/3 MCA territory, associated with increased hemorrhagic transformation risk |
5.2 Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS)
ASPECTS is a 10-point quantitative scoring system applied to NCCT (or CT angiography source images) to assess the extent of early ischemic changes in the middle cerebral artery territory. It is a critical tool for patient selection in endovascular thrombectomy.14
ASPECTS Regions
ASPECTS divides the MCA territory into 10 regions across two standardized axial CT levels:
Ganglionic Level (basal ganglia level):
| Region | Abbreviation | Anatomical Description |
|---|---|---|
| Caudate nucleus | C | Head of the caudate nucleus |
| Lentiform nucleus | L | Globus pallidus and putamen |
| Internal capsule | IC | Posterior limb of the internal capsule |
| Insular cortex | I | Insular ribbon (cortex of the insula) |
| Anterior MCA cortex (ganglionic) | M1 | Anterior MCA cortex at the ganglionic level (frontal operculum) |
| MCA cortex lateral to insular ribbon (ganglionic) | M2 | MCA cortex lateral to the insular ribbon at the ganglionic level (anterior temporal lobe) |
| Posterior MCA cortex (ganglionic) | M3 | Posterior MCA cortex at the ganglionic level (posterior temporal lobe) |
Supraganglionic Level (above the basal ganglia):
| Region | Abbreviation | Anatomical Description |
|---|---|---|
| Anterior MCA cortex (supraganglionic) | M4 | Anterior MCA cortex at the supraganglionic level |
| Lateral MCA cortex (supraganglionic) | M5 | Lateral MCA cortex at the supraganglionic level |
| Posterior MCA cortex (supraganglionic) | M6 | Posterior MCA cortex at the supraganglionic level (including superior parietal and posterior temporal regions) |
ASPECTS Scoring
- Start with 10 points (normal CT)
- Subtract 1 point for each region showing early ischemic change (hypoattenuation, loss of gray-white differentiation, or sulcal effacement)
- Score of 10 = normal CT, no early ischemic changes
- Score of 0 = ischemic changes in all 10 MCA regions
| ASPECTS Score | Interpretation | Treatment Implications |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | Normal — no ischemic changes | Thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy if indicated |
| 7-9 | Small early ischemic changes | Favorable for both thrombolysis and thrombectomy |
| ≥ 6 | Standard threshold for thrombectomy eligibility | Thrombectomy indicated if LVO and other criteria met |
| 4-5 | Moderate ischemic changes | Thrombectomy benefit uncertain; individual risk-benefit |
| 0-3 | Extensive ischemic changes (> 1/3 MCA territory) | Thrombectomy generally NOT recommended; high risk of hemorrhagic transformation |
ASPECTS Limitations
- Interrater reliability is moderate (kappa 0.5-0.7); automated ASPECTS software improves consistency
- ASPECTS applies only to the MCA territory — not validated for ACA, PCA, or posterior circulation strokes
- Early ischemic changes may be subtle or absent in the first 3-6 hours, leading to overestimation of the ASPECTS score
- CT angiography source images may improve sensitivity for early ischemic changes compared to NCCT alone
5.3 CT Angiography (CTA)
CTA of the head and neck (arch to vertex) should be obtained in all patients with suspected acute ischemic stroke who are potential candidates for endovascular therapy. CTA should NOT delay IV thrombolysis if the patient is otherwise eligible.1 2
Key CTA Findings
| Finding | Significance |
|---|---|
| Intracranial vessel occlusion | Identifies LVO (ICA, M1, M2, basilar); confirms thrombectomy target |
| Extracranial ICA stenosis/occlusion | Tandem lesions; may require carotid stenting during thrombectomy |
| Cervical artery dissection | Dissection flap, intimal irregularity, pseudoaneurysm; important stroke etiology in young patients |
| Collateral circulation | Robust collaterals predict smaller infarct core and better outcomes; poor collaterals predict larger infarcts |
CTA Collateral Assessment
| Collateral Grade | Description | Clinical Significance |
|---|---|---|
| 0 (Absent) | No collateral supply to the ischemic territory | Poor prognosis; large infarct core likely |
| 1 (Poor) | Collateral filling ≤ 50% of the ischemic territory | Poor prognosis |
| 2 (Moderate) | Collateral filling > 50% but < 100% of the ischemic territory | Intermediate prognosis |
| 3 (Good) | Complete collateral filling of the ischemic territory | Favorable prognosis; more salvageable tissue |
5.4 CT Perfusion (CTP)
CT perfusion provides a tissue-level assessment of cerebral hemodynamics and is the primary imaging modality for selecting patients in the extended time window (6-24 hours) for endovascular thrombectomy. CTP generates parametric maps that distinguish the ischemic core (irreversibly damaged tissue) from the penumbra (at-risk but potentially salvageable tissue).15 16
CTP Parameters
| Parameter | Definition | Clinical Application |
|---|---|---|
| Cerebral blood flow (CBF) | Volume of blood passing through brain tissue per unit time (mL/100g/min) | CBF < 30% of contralateral normal = ischemic core (most commonly used threshold) |
| Cerebral blood volume (CBV) | Total volume of blood in a given volume of brain tissue (mL/100g) | Reduced CBV indicates irreversible infarction |
| Mean transit time (MTT) | Average time for blood to pass through the capillary bed (seconds) | Prolonged MTT indicates ischemic tissue (core + penumbra) |
| Time to peak (TTP) | Time from contrast arrival to peak enhancement | Prolonged TTP indicates hypoperfused tissue |
| Time to maximum (Tmax) | Time delay of the tissue residue function relative to the arterial input function | Tmax > 6 seconds = critically hypoperfused tissue (used in DAWN/DEFUSE-3) |
Perfusion Mismatch for Treatment Selection
| Concept | Definition | Treatment Implication |
|---|---|---|
| Ischemic core | Tissue with CBF < 30% of normal (or CBV significantly reduced) | Irreversibly damaged; not salvageable |
| Penumbra (critically hypoperfused) | Tissue with Tmax > 6 seconds minus the ischemic core | Potentially salvageable with reperfusion |
| Target mismatch | Mismatch ratio ≥ 1.8 AND absolute mismatch volume ≥ 15 mL AND ischemic core < 70 mL | Used in DEFUSE-3 to select patients for EVT in the 6-16 hour window |
5.5 MRI in Acute Stroke
MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is the most sensitive imaging modality for detecting acute ischemic stroke, with sensitivity > 95% within minutes of symptom onset. However, MRI is not routinely used as the first-line imaging study in acute stroke due to longer acquisition time and limited availability.1 17
Key MRI Sequences in Acute Stroke
| Sequence | Findings | Clinical Application |
|---|---|---|
| DWI (Diffusion-Weighted Imaging) | Restricted diffusion (bright signal) in acute infarct core | Most sensitive for acute ischemia; positive within minutes |
| ADC (Apparent Diffusion Coefficient) map | Dark signal (low ADC) in acute infarct | Confirms DWI findings; distinguishes acute from chronic (T2 shine-through) |
| FLAIR (Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery) | Hyperintense signal in subacute/chronic infarct; vessel hyperintensity | DWI-FLAIR mismatch: DWI positive but FLAIR negative suggests onset < 4.5 hours (used for wake-up stroke selection) |
| GRE/SWI (Gradient Echo/Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging) | Blooming artifact from blood products; microbleeds | Detects hemorrhage; microbleed burden may influence thrombolysis risk assessment |
| MRA (MR Angiography) | Vessel occlusion, stenosis | Alternative to CTA for vessel imaging |
| PWI (Perfusion-Weighted Imaging) | Perfusion maps (similar to CTP) | DWI-PWI mismatch identifies salvageable tissue |
DWI-FLAIR Mismatch for Wake-Up Stroke
In patients who awaken with stroke symptoms (unknown time of onset), the DWI-FLAIR mismatch concept identifies patients whose stroke likely occurred within the thrombolysis treatment window:18
- DWI positive + FLAIR negative = likely onset within 4.5 hours → may be eligible for IV thrombolysis (supported by the WAKE-UP trial)
- DWI positive + FLAIR positive = likely onset > 4.5 hours → thrombolysis eligibility depends on perfusion imaging and extended-window criteria
6. Door-to-Imaging Workflow
6.1 Recommended Acute Stroke Imaging Algorithm
Patient with suspected acute stroke
│
├─ ALL PATIENTS: Non-contrast CT head (door-to-CT ≤ 20 min)
│ ├─ Hemorrhage present → ICH or SAH pathway
│ └─ No hemorrhage → Acute ischemic stroke pathway
│ │
│ ├─ LKW 0–4.5 hours: Evaluate for IV thrombolysis
│ │ └─ CTA head/neck (do not delay tPA for CTA)
│ │ └─ LVO identified → Evaluate for thrombectomy
│ │
│ ├─ LKW 4.5–24 hours (or unknown/wake-up):
│ │ ├─ CTA head/neck → LVO identified?
│ │ ├─ CT perfusion or MRI DWI/PWI → Mismatch analysis
│ │ └─ If mismatch criteria met → Evaluate for thrombectomy
│ │ (DAWN 6-24h or DEFUSE-3 6-16h criteria)
│ │
│ └─ Wake-up stroke with unknown onset:
│ ├─ MRI: DWI-FLAIR mismatch → If present, consider IV thrombolysis
│ │ (WAKE-UP trial criteria)
│ └─ CTP: Perfusion mismatch → If present, consider EVT
References
Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. “Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines.” Stroke. 2019;50(12):e344-e418. DOI: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000211 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎
Goyal M, Menon BK, van Zwam WH, et al. “Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials.” Lancet. 2016;387(10029):1723-1731. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00163-X ↩︎ ↩︎
Greenberg SM, Ziai WC, Cordonnier C, et al. “2022 Guideline for Management of Patients With Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage.” Stroke. 2022;53(7):e282-e361. DOI: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000407 ↩︎
Hoh BL, Ko NU, Amin-Hanjani S, et al. “2023 Guideline for the Management of Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.” Stroke. 2023;54(7):e314-e370. DOI: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000436 ↩︎
Easton JD, Saver JL, Albers GW, et al. “Definition and evaluation of transient ischemic attack.” Stroke. 2009;40(6):2276-2293. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.192218 ↩︎
Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. “Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals.” Stroke. 2013;44(3):870-947. DOI: 10.1161/STR.0b013e318284056a ↩︎ ↩︎
Kothari RU, Pancioli A, Liu T, et al. “Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale: reproducibility and validity.” Ann Emerg Med. 1999;33(4):373-378. DOI: 10.1016/S0196-0644(99)70299-4 ↩︎
Nazliel B, Starkman S, Liebeskind DS, et al. “A brief prehospital stroke severity scale identifies ischemic stroke patients harboring persisting large arterial occlusions.” Stroke. 2008;39(8):2264-2267. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.508127 ↩︎
Perez de la Ossa N, Carrera D, Gorchs M, et al. “Design and validation of a prehospital stroke scale to predict large arterial occlusion: the Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation Scale.” Stroke. 2014;45(1):87-91. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003071 ↩︎
Lima FO, Silva GS, Furie KL, et al. “Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination: a simple and accurate prehospital scale to detect large vessel occlusion strokes.” Stroke. 2016;47(8):1997-2002. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.013301 ↩︎
Teleb MS, Ver Hage A, Carter J, et al. “Stroke vision, aphasia, neglect (VAN) assessment — a novel emergent large vessel occlusion screening tool: pilot study and comparison with current clinical severity indices.” J NeuroIntervent Surg. 2017;9(2):122-126. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012131 ↩︎
Brott T, Adams HP Jr, Olinger CP, et al. “Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale.” Stroke. 1989;20(7):864-870. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.20.7.864 ↩︎
Latchaw RE, Alberts MJ, Lev MH, et al. “Recommendations for imaging of acute ischemic stroke: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.” Stroke. 2009;40(11):3646-3678. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.192616 ↩︎
Barber PA, Demchuk AM, Zhang J, Buchan AM. “Validity and reliability of a quantitative computed tomography score in predicting outcome of hyperacute stroke before thrombolytic therapy. ASPECTS Study Group.” Lancet. 2000;355(9216):1670-1674. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02237-6 ↩︎
Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, et al. “Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct.” N Engl J Med. 2018;378(1):11-21. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1706442 ↩︎
Albers GW, Marks MP, Kemp S, et al. “Thrombectomy for stroke at 6 to 16 hours with selection by perfusion imaging.” N Engl J Med. 2018;378(8):708-718. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1713973 ↩︎
Chalela JA, Kidwell CS, Nentwich LM, et al. “Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in emergency assessment of patients with suspected acute stroke: a prospective comparison.” Lancet. 2007;369(9558):293-298. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60151-2 ↩︎
Thomalla G, Simonsen CZ, Boutitie F, et al. “MRI-Guided Thrombolysis for Stroke with Unknown Time of Onset.” N Engl J Med. 2018;379(7):611-622. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804355 ↩︎