Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI) carries high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Accurate neuroprognostication is essential in guiding clinical decisions, including patient triage and transition to comfort measures. Here we provide recommendations regarding the reliability of major clinical predictors and prediction models commonly used in msTBI neuroprognostication, guiding clinicians in counseling surrogate decision-makers. METHODS: Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, we conducted a systematic narrative review of the most clinically relevant predictors and prediction models cited in the literature. The review involved framing specific population/intervention/comparator/outcome/timing/setting (PICOTS) questions and employing stringent full-text screening criteria to examine the literature, focusing on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, desirability of outcomes, values and preferences, and resource use. Moreover, good practice recommendations addressing the key principles of neuroprognostication were drafted. RESULTS: After screening 8125 articles, 41 met our eligibility criteria. Ten clinical variables and nine grading scales were selected. Many articles varied in defining "poor" functional outcomes. For consistency, we treated "poor" as "unfavorable". Although many clinical variables are associated with poor outcome in msTBI, only the presence of bilateral pupillary nonreactivity on admission, conditional on accurate assessment without confounding from medications or injuries, was deemed moderately reliable for counseling surrogates regarding 6-month functional outcomes or in-hospital mortality. In terms of prediction models, the Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH)-basic, CRASH-CT (CRASH-basic extended by computed tomography features), International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT)-core, IMPACT-extended, and IMPACT-lab models were recommended as moderately reliable in predicting 14-day to 6-month mortality and functional outcomes at 6 months and beyond. When using "moderately reliable" predictors or prediction models, the clinician must acknowledge "substantial" uncertainty in the prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations to clinicians on the formal reliability of individual predictors and prediction models of poor outcome when counseling surrogates of patients with msTBI and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication.

Guidelines for neuroprognostication in adults with traumatic spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) impacts patients and their families acutely and often for the long term. The ability of clinicians to share prognostic information about mortality and functional outcomes allows patients and their surrogates to engage in decision-making and plan for the future. These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of acute-phase clinical predictors to inform neuroprognostication and guide clinicians in counseling adult patients with tSCI or their surrogates. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Candidate predictors, including clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Timing/Setting question was framed as "When counseling patients or surrogates of critically ill patients with traumatic spinal cord injury, should < predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate > be considered a reliable predictor of < outcome, with time frame of assessment >?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower quality studies. Following construction of an evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. Good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in the Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Timing/Setting format. Throughout the guideline development process, an individual living with tSCI provided perspective on patient-centered priorities. RESULTS: Six candidate clinical variables and one prediction model were selected. Out of 11,132 articles screened, 369 met inclusion criteria for full-text review and 35 articles met eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. We recommend pathologic findings on magnetic resonance imaging, neurological level of injury, and severity of injury as moderately reliable predictors of American Spinal Cord Injury Impairment Scale improvement and the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule as a moderately reliable prediction model of independent ambulation at 1 year after injury. No other reliable or moderately reliable predictors of mortality or functional outcome were identified. Good practice recommendations include considering the complete clinical condition as opposed to a single variable and communicating the challenges of likely functional deficits as well as potential for improvement and for long-term quality of life with SCI-related deficits to patients and surrogates. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations about the reliability of acute-phase predictors of mortality, functional outcome, American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grade conversion, and recovery of independent ambulation for consideration when counseling patients with tSCI or their surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication in this context.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this document is to provide recommendations on the formal reliability of major clinical predictors often associated with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) neuroprognostication. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting questions. Predictors, which included both individual clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and attention in the literature. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. Good practice statements addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting format. RESULTS: Six candidate clinical variables and two clinical grading scales (the original ICH score and maximally treated ICH score) were selected for recommendation creation. A total of 347 articles out of 10,751 articles screened met our eligibility criteria. Consensus statements of good practice included deferring neuroprognostication-aside from the most clinically devastated patients-for at least the first 48-72 h of intensive care unit admission; understanding what outcomes would have been most valued by the patient; and counseling of patients and surrogates whose ultimate neurological recovery may occur over a variable period of time. Although many clinical variables and grading scales are associated with ICH poor outcome, no clinical variable alone or sole clinical grading scale was suggested by the panel as currently being reliable by itself for use in counseling patients with ICH and their surrogates, regarding functional outcome at 3 months and beyond or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the formal reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling patients with ICH and surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Clinicians formulating their judgments of prognosis for patients with ICH should avoid anchoring bias based solely on any one clinical variable or published clinical grading scale.

Large diameter hemicraniectomy does not improve long-term outcome in malignant infarction.

INTRODUCTION: In malignant cerebral infarction decompressive hemicraniectomy has demonstrated beneficial effects, but the optimum size of hemicraniectomy is still a matter of debate. Some surgeons prefer a large-sized hemicraniectomy with a diameter of more than 14 cm (HC > 14). We investigated whether this approach is associated with reduced mortality and an improved long-term functional outcome compared to a standard hemicraniectomy with a diameter of less than 14 cm (HC ≤ 14). METHODS: Patients from the DESTINY (DEcompressive Surgery for the Treatment of malignant INfarction of the middle cerebral arterY) registry who received hemicraniectomy were dichotomized according to the hemicraniectomy diameter (HC ≤ 14 cm vs. HC > 14 cm). The primary outcome was modified Rankin scale (mRS) score ≤ 4 after 12 months. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, mRS ≤ 3 and mortality after 12 months, and the rate of hemicraniectomy-related complications. The diameter of the hemicraniectomy was examined as an independent predictor of functional outcome in multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Among 130 patients (32.3% female, mean (SD) age 55 (11) years), the mean hemicraniectomy diameter was 13.6 cm. 42 patients (32.3%) had HC > 14. There were no significant differences in the primary outcome and mortality by size of hemicraniectomy. Rate of complications did not differ (HC ≤ 14 27.6% vs. HC > 14 36.6%, p = 0.302). Age and infarct volume but not hemicraniectomy diameter were associated with outcome in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: In this post-hoc analysis, large hemicraniectomy was not associated with an improved outcome or lower mortality in unselected patients with malignant middle cerebral artery infarction. Randomized trials should further examine whether individual patients could benefit from a large-sized hemicraniectomy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: German Clinical Trials Register (URL: https://www.drks.de ; Unique Identifier: DRKS00000624).

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Adults with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) often carries a favorable prognosis. Of adult patients with GBS, 10-30% require mechanical ventilation during the acute phase of the disease. After the acute phase, the focus shifts to restoration of motor strength, ambulation, and neurological function, with variable speed and degree of recovery. The objective of these guidelines is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling adult patients with GBS and/or their surrogates. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, including clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and presence of appropriate body of evidence. The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Time frame/Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling patients or surrogates of critically ill patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of [outcome, with time frame of assessment]?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower quality studies. Following construction of an evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eight candidate clinical variables and six prediction models were selected. A total of 45 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. We recommend bulbar weakness (the degree of motor weakness at disease nadir) and the Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score as moderately reliable for prediction of the need for mechanical ventilation. The Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (EGOS) and modified EGOS were identified as moderately reliable predictors of independent ambulation at 3 months and beyond. Good practice recommendations include consideration of both acute and recovery phases of the disease during prognostication, discussion of the possible need for mechanical ventilation and enteral nutrition during counseling, and consideration of the complete clinical condition as opposed to a single variable during prognostication. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of the need for mechanical ventilation, poor functional outcome, and independent ambulation following GBS in the context of counseling patients and/or surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence, and higher quality data are needed.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Comatose Adult Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Among cardiac arrest survivors, about half remain comatose 72 h following return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Prognostication of poor neurological outcome in this population may result in withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy and death. The objective of this article is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling surrogates of comatose cardiac arrest survivors. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, which included clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling surrogates of comatose adult survivors of cardiac arrest, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of poor functional outcome assessed at 3 months or later?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower-quality studies. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eleven candidate clinical variables and three prediction models were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of literature. A total of 72 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. Good practice recommendations include waiting 72 h following ROSC/rewarming prior to neuroprognostication, avoiding sedation or other confounders, the use of multimodal assessment, and an extended period of observation for awakening in patients with an indeterminate prognosis, if consistent with goals of care. The bilateral absence of pupillary light response > 72 h from ROSC and the bilateral absence of N20 response on somatosensory evoked potential testing were identified as reliable predictors. Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain > 48 h from ROSC and electroencephalography > 72 h from ROSC were identified as moderately reliable predictors. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling surrogates of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered reliable or moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence.

Stroke Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: International Expert Panel Review.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has placed a tremendous strain on healthcare services. This study, prepared by a large international panel of stroke experts, assesses the rapidly growing research and personal experience with COVID-19 stroke and offers recommendations for stroke management in this challenging new setting: modifications needed for prehospital emergency rescue and hyperacute care; inpatient intensive or stroke units; posthospitalization rehabilitation; follow-up including at-risk family and community; and multispecialty departmental developments in the allied professions. SUMMARY: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 uses spike proteins binding to tissue angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-2 receptors, most often through the respiratory system by virus inhalation and thence to other susceptible organ systems, leading to COVID-19. Clinicians facing the many etiologies for stroke have been sobered by the unusual incidence of combined etiologies and presentations, prominent among them are vasculitis, cardiomyopathy, hypercoagulable state, and endothelial dysfunction. International standards of acute stroke management remain in force, but COVID-19 adds the burdens of personal protections for the patient, rescue, and hospital staff and for some even into the postdischarge phase. For pending COVID-19 determination and also for those shown to be COVID-19 affected, strict infection control is needed at all times to reduce spread of infection and to protect healthcare staff, using the wealth of well-described methods. For COVID-19 patients with stroke, thrombolysis and thrombectomy should be continued, and the usual early management of hypertension applies, save that recent work suggests continuing ACE inhibitors and ARBs. Prothrombotic states, some acute and severe, encourage prophylactic LMWH unless bleeding risk is high. COVID-19-related cardiomyopathy adds risk of cardioembolic stroke, where heparin or warfarin may be preferable, with experience accumulating with DOACs. As ever, arteritis can prove a difficult diagnosis, especially if not obvious on the acute angiogram done for clot extraction. This field is under rapid development and may generate management recommendations which are as yet unsettled, even undiscovered. Beyond the acute management phase, COVID-19-related stroke also forces rehabilitation services to use protective precautions. As with all stroke patients, health workers should be aware of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and/or distress developing in their patients and caregivers. Postdischarge outpatient care currently includes continued secondary prevention measures. Although hoping a COVID-19 stroke patient can be considered cured of the virus, those concerned for contact safety can take comfort in the increasing use of telemedicine, which is itself a growing source of patient-physician contacts. Many online resources are available to patients and physicians. Like prior challenges, stroke care teams will also overcome this one. Key Messages: Evidence-based stroke management should continue to be provided throughout the patient care journey, while strict infection control measures are enforced.

Effect of Recanalization on Cerebral Edema, Long-Term Outcome, and Quality of Life in Patients with Large Hemispheric Infarctions.

OBJECTIVES: Space-occupying cerebral edema is the main cause of mortality and poor functional outcome in patients with large cerebral artery occlusion (LVO). We aimed to determine whether recanalization of LVO would augment cerebral edema volume and the impact on functional outcome and quality of life (QoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively, 43 patients with large middle cerebral artery territory infarction or NIHSS ≥ 12 on admission were enrolled. The degree of recanalization (partial and complete versus no recanalization) was assessed by computed tomography (CT)-angiography or Duplex ultrasound more than 24 h after symptom onset. Cerebral edema volume was measured on follow up CTs by computer-based planimetry. Mortality, functional outcome (by modified Ranking Scale (mRS) and Barthel Index (BI)) were assessed at discharge and 12 months, and QoL (by SF-36 and EQ-5D-3L) at 12 months. RESULTS: Mean cerebral edema volume was 333±141 ml without recanalization (n=13, group 1) and 276±140 ml with partial or complete recanalization (n=30, group 2, p= 0.23). There were no significant differences in mortality at discharge (38% versus 23%), at 12 months (58% versus 48%), in functional outcome at discharge (mRS 0-3: 0% both; mRS 4-5: 62% versus 77%) and at 12 months (mRS 0-3: 0% versus 11%; mRS 4-5: 42% versus 41%). The BI improved significantly from discharge to 12 months only in group 2 (p=0.001). Mean physical component score in SF-36 was 25.6±6.4, psychological component score was 41.9±14.1. In the EQ-5D-3L, most patients reported problems with activities of daily living, reduced mobility, and selfcare. CONCLUSIONS: Recanalization of a large cerebral artery occlusion in the anterior circulation territories is not associated with amplification of post-ischemic cerebral edema but may be correlated with better long-term functional outcome. QoL was low and mainly dependent on physical disability. The association between recanalization, collateral status and development of cerebral edema after LVO and the effect on functional outcome and quality of life should be explored in a larger patient population.

Triage and Allocation of Neurocritical Care Resources During the COVID 19 Pandemic - A National Survey.

Objective: In light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the associated hospitalization of an overwhelming number of ventilator-dependent patients, medical and/or ethical patient triage paradigms have become essential. While guidelines on the allocation of scarce resources do exist, such work within the subdisciplines of intensive care (e.g., neurocritical care) remains limited. Methods: A 16-item questionnaire was developed that sought to explore/quantify the expert opinions of German neurointensivists with regard to triage decisions. The anonymous survey was conducted via a web-based platform and in total, 96 members of the Initiative of German Neurointensive Trial Engagement (IGNITE)-study group were contacted via e-mail. The IGNITE consortium consists of an interdisciplinary panel of specialists with expertise in neuro-critical care (i.e., anesthetists, neurologists and neurosurgeons). Results: Fifty members of the IGNITE consortium responded to the questionnaire; in total the respondents were in charge of more than 500 Neuro ICU beds throughout Germany. Common determinants reported which affected triage decisions included known patient wishes (98%), the state of health before admission (96%), SOFA-score (85%) and patient age (69%). Interestingly, other principles of allocation, such as a treatment of "youngest first" (61%) and members of the healthcare sector (50%) were also noted. While these were the most accepted parameters affecting the triage of patients, a "first-come, first-served" principle appeared to be more accepted than a lottery for the allocation of ICU beds which contradicts much of what has been reported within the literature. The respondents also felt that at least one neurointensivist should serve on any interdisciplinary triage team. Conclusions: The data gathered in the context of this survey reveal the estimation/perception of triage algorithms among neurointensive care specialists facing COVID-19. Further, it is apparent that German neurointensivists strongly feel that they should be involved in any triage decisions at an institutional level given the unique resources needed to treat patients within the Neuro ICU.

Gap Analysis Regarding Prognostication in Neurocritical Care: A Joint Statement from the German Neurocritical Care Society and the Neurocritical Care Society.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Prognostication is a routine part of the delivery of neurocritical care for most patients with acute neurocritical illnesses. Numerous prognostic models exist for many different conditions. However, there are concerns about significant gaps in knowledge regarding optimal methods of prognostication. METHODS: As part of the Arbeitstagung NeuroIntensivMedizin meeting in February 2018 in Würzburg, Germany, a joint session on prognostication was held between the German NeuroIntensive Care Society and the Neurocritical Care Society. The purpose of this session was to provide presentations and open discussion regarding existing prognostic models for eight common neurocritical care conditions (aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, intracerebral hemorrhage, acute ischemic stroke, traumatic brain injury, traumatic spinal cord injury, status epilepticus, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, and global cerebral ischemia from cardiac arrest). The goal was to develop a qualitative gap analysis regarding prognostication that could help inform a future framework for clinical studies and guidelines. RESULTS: Prognostic models exist for all of the conditions presented. However, there are significant gaps in prognostication in each condition. Furthermore, several themes emerged that crossed across several or all diseases presented. Specifically, the self-fulfilling prophecy, lack of accounting for medical comorbidities, and absence of integration of in-hospital care parameters were identified as major gaps in most prognostic models. CONCLUSIONS: Prognostication in neurocritical care is important, and current prognostic models are limited. This gap analysis provides a summary assessment of issues that could be addressed in future studies and evidence-based guidelines in order to improve the process of prognostication.

Correction to: Gap Analysis Regarding Prognostication in Neurocritical Care: A Joint Statement from the German Neurocritical Care Society and the Neurocritical Care Society.

This article was updated to correct the spelling of Karl Georg Haeusler.

Foodborne botulism due to ingestion of home-canned green beans: two case reports.

BACKGROUND: Foodborne botulism is a life-threatening, rapidly progressive disease. It has an incidence of less than 10 cases per year in Germany and mostly affects several previously healthy people at the same time. The only specific treatment is the administration of botulism antitoxin. According to the German guidelines administration of antitoxin is recommended only in the first 24 hours after oral ingestion of the toxin. CASE PRESENTATION: A 47-year-old white woman and her 51-year-old white husband presented with paralysis of multiple cranial nerves and rapidly descending paralysis approximately 72 hours after ingestion of home-canned beans. The disease was complicated by autonomic changes like hypertension, febrile temperatures, and a paralytic ileus. The diagnosis was confirmed by identification of botulinum neurotoxin type A in the serum of the woman. In accordance with the German guidelines, antitoxin was not given due to the prolonged time interval at diagnosis. Both patients had a long intensive care unit course requiring ventilation for approximately 5 months. Finally they recovered completely. CONCLUSIONS: A full recovery from foodborne botulism is possible even in patients with intensive care lasting several months. There are only case reports indicating that administration of antitoxin may shorten the course of the disease, even if given later than 24 hours after intoxication. Due to the rarity of the disease and its rapid course there are no randomized controlled trials. Thus, evidence of the superiority of this treatment is lacking. However, the prevailing view according to the German guidelines to administer antitoxin only within 24 hours after ingestion of the toxin should be questioned in the case of progression of the disease with proof of remaining toxin in the blood.

Intensive Care Unit Admission for Patients in the INTERACT2 ICH Blood Pressure Treatment Trial: Characteristics, Predictors, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Wide variation exists in criteria for accessing intensive care unit (ICU) facilities for managing patients with critical illnesses such as acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We aimed to determine the predictors of admission, length of stay, and outcome for ICU among participants of the main Intensive Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trial (INTERACT2). METHODS: INTERACT2 was an international, open, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled trial of 2839 ICH patients (<6 h) and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) allocated to receive intensive (target SBP <140 mmHg within 1 h) or guideline-recommended (target SBP <180 mmHg) BP-lowering treatment. The primary outcome was death or major disability, defined by modified Rankin scale scores 3-6 at 90 days. Logistic regression and propensity score analyses were used to determine independent associations. MAIN RESULTS: Predictors of ICU admission included younger age, recruitment in China, prior ischemic/undetermined stroke, high SBP, severe stroke [National Institute of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score ≥15], large ICH volume (≥15 mL), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) extension, early neurological deterioration, intubation and surgery. Determinants of prolonged ICU stay (≥5 days) were prior antihypertensive use, NIHSS ≥15, large ICH volume, lobar ICH location, IVH, early neurological deterioration, intubation and surgery. ICU admission was associated with higher-risk major disability at 90-day assessment compared to those without ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents prognostic variables for ICU management and outcome of ICH patients included in a large international cohort. These data may assist in the selection and counseling of patients and families concerning ICU admission.

Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein Serum Levels Distinguish between Intracerebral Hemorrhage and Cerebral Ischemia in the Early Phase of Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have suggested that glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) serum concentrations distinguish between intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and ischemic stroke (IS) shortly after symptom onset. In this prospective multicenter trial we validated GFAP in an independent patient cohort and assessed the quantitative relationship between GFAP release, bleeding size, and localization. METHODS: We included patients with a persistent neurological deficit (NIH Stroke Scale ≥4) suggestive of stroke within 6 h of symptom onset. Blood samples were drawn at hospital admission. GFAP serum concentrations were measured using an electrochemiluminometric immunoassay. Primary endpoint was the final diagnosis established at hospital discharge (ICH, IS, or stroke mimic). RESULTS: 202 patients were included (45 with ICH, 146 with IS, 11 stroke mimics). GFAP concentrations were significantly higher in ICH than in IS patients [median (interquartile range) 0.16 µg/L (0.04-3.27) vs 0.01 µg/L (0.01-0.01), P <0.001]. A GFAP cutoff of 0.03 µg/L provided a sensitivity of 77.8% and a specificity of 94.2% in distinguishing ICH from IS and stroke mimics [ROC analysis area under the curve 0.872 (95% CI, 0.802-0.942), P <0.001]. GFAP serum concentrations were positively correlated with ICH volume. Lobar ICH volumes were larger and thus associated with higher GFAP concentrations as compared to deep ICH. CONCLUSIONS: Serum GFAP was confirmed to be a biomarker indicating ICH in patients presenting with acute stroke symptoms. Very small ICH may be missed owing to less tissue destruction.