It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
Endovascular therapy (EVT) offers a highly effective therapy for patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion. Comprehensive stroke centers (CSC) are required to provide permanent accessibility to EVT. However, when affected patients are not located in the immediate catchment area of a CSC, i.e. in rural or structurally weaker areas, access to EVT is not always ensured.
Main body
Telestroke networks play a crucial role in closing this healthcare coverage gap and thereby support specialized stroke treatment. The aim of this narrative review is to elaborate the concepts for the indication and transfer of EVT candidates via telestroke networks in acute stroke care. The targeted readership includes both comprehensive stroke centers and peripheral hospitals. The review is intended to identify ways to design care beyond those areas with narrow access to stroke unit care to provide the indicated highly effective acute therapies on a region-wide basis. Here, the two different models of care: "mothership" and "drip-and-ship" concerning rates of EVT and its complications as well as outcomes are compared. Decisively, forward-looking new model approaches such as a third model the “flying/driving interentionalists” are introduced and discussed, as far as few clinical trials have investigated these approaches. Diagnostic criteria used by the telestroke networks to enable appropriate patient selection for secondary intrahospital emergency transfers are displayed, which need to meet the criteria in terms of speed, quality and safety.
Conclusion
The few findings from the studies with telestroke networks are neutral for comparison in the drip-and-ship and mothership models. Supporting spoke centres through telestroke networks currently seems to be the best option for offering EVT to a population in structurally weaker regions without direct access to a CSC. Here, it is essential to map the individual reality of care depending on the regional circumstances.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Klinik Für Neurologie, Hannover, Germany (GRID:grid.10423.34) (ISNI:0000 0000 9529 9877)
2 Universitätsklinikum Dresden, Klinik Für Neurologie, Dresden, Germany (GRID:grid.412282.f) (ISNI:0000 0001 1091 2917)
3 Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Klinik Für Neurologie, Heidelberg, Germany (GRID:grid.5253.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 0328 4908)