Background and Purpose-The authors present an overview of the current evidence and management recommendations for evaluation and treatment of adults with acute ischemic stroke. The intended audiences are prehospital care providers, physicians, allied health professionals, and hospital administrators responsible for the care of acute ischemic stroke patients within the first 48 hours from stroke onset. These guidelines supersede the prior 2007 guidelines and 2009 updates. Methods-Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Stroke Association Stroke Council's Scientific Statement Oversight Committee, representing various areas of medical expertise. Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Panel members were assigned topics relevant to their areas of expertise, reviewed the stroke literature with emphasis on publications since the prior guidelines, and drafted recommendations in accordance with the American Heart Association Stroke Council's Level of Evidence grading algorithm. Results-The goal of these guidelines is to limit the morbidity and mortality associated with stroke. The guidelines support the overarching concept of stroke systems of care and detail aspects of stroke care from patient recognition; emergency medical services activation, transport, and triage; through the initial hours in the emergency department and stroke unit. The guideline discusses early stroke evaluation and general medical care, as well as ischemic stroke, specific interventions such as reperfusion strategies, and general physiological optimization for cerebral resuscitation. The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of an outside relationship or a personal, professional, or business interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit a Disclosure Questionnaire showing all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. Guidelines for the Early Management of PatientsThis statement was approved by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee on December 12, 2012. A copy of the document is available at http://my.americanheart.org/statements by selecting either the "By Topic" link or the "By Publication Date" link. To purchase additional reprints, call 843-216-2533 or e-mail kelle.ramsay@wolterskluwer.com.The Executive Summary is available as an online-only Data Supplement with this article at http://stroke.ahajournals.org/lookup/suppl/ doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318284056a/-/DC1.The American Heart Association requests that this document be cited as follows: Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, Bruno A, Connors JJ, Demaerschalk BM, Khatri P, McMullan PW Jr, Qureshi AI, Rosenfield K, Scott PA, Summers DR, Wang DZ, Wintermark M, Yonas H; on behalf of the American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardio...

Background and Purpose-In clinical trials and observational studies there is considerable inconsistency in the use of definitions to describe delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. A major cause for this inconsistency is the combining of radiographic evidence of vasospasm with clinical features of cerebral ischemia, although multiple factors may contribute to DCI. The second issue is the variability and overlap of terms used to describe each phenomenon. This makes comparisons among studies difficult. Methods-An international ad hoc panel of experts involved in subarachnoid hemorrhage research developed and proposed a definition of DCI to be used as an outcome measure in clinical trials and observational studies. We used a consensus-building approach. Results-It is proposed that in observational studies and clinical trials aiming to investigate strategies to prevent DCI, the 2 main outcome measures should be: (1) cerebral infarction identified on CT or MRI or proven at autopsy, after exclusion of procedure-related infarctions; and (2)

Summary Background The inconsistent effect of hypothermia treatment on severe brain injury in previous trials might be because hypothermia was induced too late after injury. We aimed to assess whether very early induction of hypothermia improves outcome in patients with severe brain injury. Methods The National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia II (NABIS: H II) was a randomised, multicentre clinical trial of patients with severe brain injury who were enrolled within 2·5 h of injury at six sites in the USA and Canada. Patients with non-penetrating brain injury who were 16–45 years old and were not responsive to instructions were randomly assigned (1:1) by a random number generator to hypothermia or normothermia. Patients randomly assigned to hypothermia were cooled to 35°C until their trauma assessment was completed. Patients who had none of a second set of exclusion criteria were either cooled to 33°C for 48 h and then gradually rewarmed or treated at normothermia, depending upon their initial treatment assignment. Investigators who assessed the outcome measures were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the Glasgow outcome scale score at 6 months. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00178711. Findings Enrolment occurred from December, 2005, to June, 2009, when the trial was terminated for futility. Follow-up was from June, 2006, to December, 2009. 232 patients were initially randomised a mean of 1·6 h (SD 0·5) after injury: 119 to hypothermia and 113 to normothermia. 97 patients (52 in the hypothermia group and 45 in the normothermia group) did not meet any of the second set of exclusion criteria. The mean time to 35°C for the 52 patients in the hypothermia group was 2·6 h (SD 1·2) and to 33°C was 4·4 h (1·5). Outcome was poor (severe disability, vegetative state, or death) in 31 of 52 patients in the hypothermia group and 25 of 56 in the normothermia group (relative risk [RR] 1·08, 95% CI 0·76–1·53; p=0·67). 12 patients in the hypothermia group died compared with eight in the normothermia group (RR 1·30, 95% CI 0·58–2·52; p=0·52). Interpretation This trial did not confirm the utility of hypothermia as a primary neuroprotective strategy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Funding National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.