This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 40/4/1522    most recent STROKEAHA.108.530352v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Winkler, D. T. Articles by Engelter, S. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Winkler, D. T. Articles by Engelter, S. T. Related Collections Emergency treatment of Stroke Thrombolysis

(Stroke. 2009;40:1522.)
© 2009 American Heart Association, Inc.

Research Letters

Thrombolysis in Stroke Mimics

Frequency, Clinical Characteristics, and Outcome

David T. Winkler, MD, PhD; Felix Fluri, MD; Peter Fuhr, MD; Stephan G. Wetzel, MD; Philippe A. Lyrer, MD; Stephan Ruegg, MD Stefan T. Engelter, MD

From the Neurological Clinic (D.T.W., F.F., P.F., P.A.L., S.R., S.T.E.) and the Department of Neuroradiology (S.G.W.), University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Correspondence to D.T. Winkler, MD, PhD, and S.T. Engelter, MD, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 3, 4031 Basel, Switzerland. E-mail winklerd{at}uhbs.ch and engelters@uhbs.ch

Background and Purpose— Intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke is usually based on clinical assessment, blood test results, and CT findings. Intravenous thrombolysis of stroke mimics may occur but has not been studied in detail.

Methods— We determined frequency, clinical characteristics, and outcome of mimic patients versus patients with stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis using data of a prospective, single-center thrombolysis data bank.

Results— Among 250 patients, 243 (97.2%) had strokes and 7 (2.8%) were mimics. Seizure was the most frequent diagnosis among mimics. There was a trend toward lower National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores in mimics (9.9±4.2) compared with strokes (13.7±5.4; P=0.06). Global aphasia without hemiparesis was the presenting symptom in 3 (42.9%) mimics versus 8 (3.3%) strokes (P=0.002). Orolingual angioedema, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 3 (1.2%), 13 (5.3%), and 30 (12.3%) patients with stroke, but were absent in mimics. After 3 months, 6 (85.7%) mimics and 86 (35.4%) strokes had a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1 (P=0.01).

Conclusions— Only few patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis did eventually have a final diagnosis other than stroke, ie, mostly seizures. Their outcome was favorable. Although clinical features differed between the stroke and the mimic groups, the differences were not distinctive enough to allow assigning individual patients to either of the groups. Multimodal neuroimaging or electroencephalographic recordings may be helpful for this assignment. However, their potential benefit has to be weighed against the potential harm of delayed thrombolysis.

Key Words: epilepsy • global asphasia without hemiparesis • stroke • stroke mimics • thrombolysis