(duplicate) PRACTISE

• Research type

  Research Study

• Full title

  Penumbra and Recanalisation Acute Computed Tomography in Ischaemic Stroke Evaluation

• IRAS ID

  169728

• Contact name

  Keith Muir

• Contact email

  Keith.Muir@glasgow.ac.uk

• Sponsor organisation

  NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde

• Duration of Study in the UK

  2 years, 0 months, 0 days

• Research summary

  Stroke affects over 125,000 people each year in the UK and leaves at least 50% disabled. Treatment of stroke caused by a blockage in a blood vessel (ischaemic stroke), with clot-busting drugs improves the chances of good recovery, but must be given within 4.5 hours of onset. Currently only a small proportion of patients who arrive in hospital within 4.5 hours are treated. This is largely due to uncertainty about diagnosis and concerns about risk of bleeding associated with clot-busting medication. Patients with mild or improving symptoms in particular are often not treated because of uncertainty about relative risks and benefits. However, around one third of these patients go on to be significantly disabled. Routine CT scanning often does not show abnormalities in acute stroke (which take hours to become easily visible), and cannot show the extent or severity of blood flow changes in ischemic stroke.
  We wish to investigate the value of additional CT scanning that gives information on the blood vessels (angiography, CTA) and blood flow to the brain (perfusion, CTP) by undertaking a randomised trial. Extra scans are done in the same scanner and involve some extra radiation, injections of a contrast dye, and some extra time to acquire process and interpret. The extra scans may allow better treatment decisions for patients by increasing diagnostic certainty and by better assessment of stroke severity. However, we do not know whether the potential gains from better selection justify the resources and potential treatment delays that are involved. We will investigate whether the proportion of patients given clot-busting drugs differs between the two scanning protocols; and whether the outcomes differ, using standard measures of disability. We will also investigate whether use of different scanner manufacturers' software affect interpretation of scans.

• REC name

  East Midlands - Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee

• REC reference

  14/EM/1291

• Date of REC Opinion

  16 Dec 2014

• REC opinion

  Favourable Opinion