Journal of Neurology

, Volume 265, Issue 11, pp 2525–2530 | Cite as

Worse endovascular mechanical recanalization results for patients with in-hospital onset acute ischemic stroke

  • Sebastian MönchEmail author
  • Manuel Lehm
  • Christian Maegerlein
  • Dennis Hedderich
  • Maria Berndt
  • Tobias Boeckh-Behrens
  • Silke Wunderlich
  • Kornelia Kreiser
  • Claus Zimmer
  • Benjamin Friedrich
Original Communication



Strokes with onset inside the hospital account for approximately 2–17% of all acute ischemic strokes. The few existing studies addressing these in-hospital strokes lack a thorough analysis of patients who underwent endovascular mechanical thrombectomy—the state of the art therapy for acute strokes due to large vessel occlusions. The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mechanical revascularization therapy in in-hospital stroke patients.


In a single-center case–control study, a propensity score-matched analysis in a 1:2 ratio with the covariates sex, age, type of occluded large vessel, i.v. thrombolysis, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale prior to endovascular mechanical thrombectomy was performed. All identified in-hospital stroke patients between 2010 and 2017 were matched to two consecutive out-of-hospital stroke patients.


27 in-hospital strokes were compared to 54 out-of-hospital strokes. After propensity score matching, the baseline characteristics were well balanced between these groups. The times for symptom onset to alarm, symptom onset to imaging, symptom onset/alarm to start of recanalization and symptom onset to final recanalization respectively were faster in in-hospital stroke patients. In contrast, the recanalization procedure itself took significantly longer in in-house patients and had a significantly lower rate of technical success resulting in significantly worse clinical outcomes.


The recognition, assessment and pre-interventional procedures of patients with in-hospital strokes and subsequent mechanical thrombectomy are favorable. Nevertheless, in-hospital stroke patients display inferior recanalization results and poorer clinical outcomes. Furthermore, we find mechanical thrombectomy seems safe for treatment of in-hospital strokes.


Acute stroke In hospital stroke Thrombectomy Reperfusion Outcomes Safety 


Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the local ethics committee of the Technical University Munich. It has, therefore, been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Written patient consent was waived by the local ethics committee due to the retrospective design.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Cumbler E et al (2011) Quality of care for in-hospital stroke: analysis of a statewide registry. Stroke 42(1):207–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cumbler E (2015) In-hospital ischemic stroke. Neurohospitalist 5(3):173–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saltman AP et al (2015) Care and outcomes of patients with in-hospital stroke. JAMA Neurol 72(7):749–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blacker DJ (2003) In-hospital stroke. Lancet Neurol 2(12):741–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berkhemer OA et al (2015) A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 372(1):11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell BC et al (2015) Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med 372(11):1009–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goyal M et al (2015) Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 372(11):1019–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jovin TG et al (2015) Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 372(24):2296–2306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saver JL et al (2015) Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. N Engl J Med 372(24):2285–2295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Higashida RT et al (2003) Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 34(8):e109–e137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cumbler E, Simpson J (2015) Code stroke: multicenter experience with in-hospital stroke alerts. J Hosp Med 10(3):179–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kassardjian CD et al (2017) In-patient code stroke: a quality improvement strategy to overcome knowledge-to-action gaps in response time. Stroke 48(8):2176–2183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alberts MJ et al (1993) Evaluation times for patients with in-hospital strokes. Stroke 24(12):1817–1822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schurmann K et al (2016) Risk profile and treatment options of acute ischemic in-hospital stroke. J Neurol 263(3):550–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Premat K et al (2017) Mechanical thrombectomy in perioperative strokes: a case–control study. Stroke 48(11):3149–3151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kelley RE, Kovacs AG (1986) Mechanism of in-hospital cerebral ischemia. Stroke 17(3):430–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vera R et al (2011) In-hospital stroke: a multi-centre prospective registry. Eur J Neurol 18(1):170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Mönch
    • 1
    Email author
  • Manuel Lehm
    • 1
  • Christian Maegerlein
    • 1
  • Dennis Hedderich
    • 1
  • Maria Berndt
    • 1
  • Tobias Boeckh-Behrens
    • 1
  • Silke Wunderlich
    • 2
  • Kornelia Kreiser
    • 1
  • Claus Zimmer
    • 1
  • Benjamin Friedrich
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical UniversityMunichGermany
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical UniversityMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations