EPMA Journal

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 393–401 | Cite as

Predictive and individualized management of stroke—success story in Czech Republic

  • Jiri Polivka
  • Jiri PolivkaJrEmail author
  • Vladimir Rohan


The model of centralized stroke care in the Czech Republic was created in 2010–2012 by Ministry of Health (MH) in cooperation with professional organization—Cerebrovascular Section of the Czech Neurological Society (CSCNS). It defines priorities of stroke care, stroke centers, triage of suspected stroke patients, stroke care quality indicators, their monitoring, and reporting. Thirteen complex cerebrovascular centers (CCC) provide sophisticated stroke care, including intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), mechanical thrombectomy (MTE), as well as other endovascular (stenting, coiling) and neurosurgical procedures. Thirty-two stroke centers (SC) provide stroke care except endovascular procedures and neurosurgery. The triage is managed by emergency medical service (EMS). The most important quality indicators of stroke care are number of hospitalized stroke patients, number of IVT, number of MTE, stenting and coiling, number of neurosurgical procedures, and percentage of deaths within 30 days. Indicators provided into the register of stroke care quality (RES-Q) managed by CSCNS are time from stroke onset to hospital admission, door-to-needle time, door-to-groin time, type of ischemic stroke, and others. Data from RES-Q are shared to all centers. Within the last 5 years, the Czech Republic becomes one of the leading countries in acute stroke care. The model of centralized stroke care is highly beneficial and effective. The quality indicators serve as tool of control of stroke centers activities. The sharing of quality indicators is useful tool for mutual competition and feedback control in each center. This comprehensive system ensures high standard of stroke care. This system respects the substantial principles of personalized medicine—individualized treatment of acute stroke and other comorbidities at the acute disease stage; optimal prevention, diagnosis and treatment of possible complications; prediction of further treatment and outcome; individualized secondary prevention, exactly according to the stroke etiology. The described model of stroke care optimally meets criteria of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine (PPPM), and could be used in other countries as well with the aim of improving stroke care quality in general.


Stroke Stroke care organization Centralized stroke care Stroke centers Intravenous thrombolysis Mechanical thrombectomy Quality indicators Personalized medicine Personalized stroke treatment Personalized stroke prevention Centralized stroke care 


Authors’ contribution

JP is the project coordinator who has created the main concepts presented in the manuscript. JP, JP Jr., and VR has performed the literature search, analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript. JP, JP Jr., and VR have designed the final version of the manuscript.

Funding information

This work was supported by MH CZ—DRO (Faculty Hospital Plzen—FNPl, 00669806), by the Charles University Research Fund (Progres Q39), and by the National Sustainability Program I (NPU I) Nr. LO1503 provided by the Ministry of Education Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic. The implementation of the stroke center was supported by the European Integrated Operational Programme—Modernization and Renovation of Comprehensive Cerebrovascular Center Equipment FN Plzen (CZ.1.06/3.2.01/08.07635).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.


  1. 1.
    Béjot Y, Bailly H, Durier J, Giroud M. Epidemiology of stroke in Europe and trends for the 21st century. Presse Medicale Paris Fr 1983. 2016;45:e391–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    European Registers of Stroke (EROS) Investigators, Heuschmann PU, Di Carlo A, Bejot Y, Rastenyte D, Ryglewicz D, et al. Incidence of stroke in Europe at the beginning of the 21st century. Stroke. 2009;40:1557–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marshall IJ, Wang Y, Crichton S, McKevitt C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CDA. The effects of socioeconomic status on stroke risk and outcomes. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:1206–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Golubnitschaja O, Costigliola V. EPMA. General report & recommendations in predictive, preventive and personalised medicine 2012: white paper of the European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine. EPMA J. 2012;3:14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Polívka J, Rohan V, Sevčík P, Polívka J. Personalized approach to primary and secondary prevention of ischemic stroke. EPMA J. 2014;5:9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Polivka J, Krakorova K, Peterka M, Topolcan O. Current status of biomarker research in neurology. EPMA J. 2016;7:14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wahlgren N, Ahmed N, Dávalos A, Ford GA, Grond M, Hacke W, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST): an observational study. Lancet Lond Engl. 2007;369:275–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, Brozman M, Dávalos A, Guidetti D, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1317–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Campbell BCV, Mitchell PJ, Yan B, Parsons MW, Christensen S, Churilov L, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled study to investigate EXtending the time for Thrombolysis in Emergency Neurological Deficits with Intra-Arterial therapy (EXTEND-IA). Int J Stroke Off J Int Stroke Soc. 2014;9:126–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goyal M, Menon BK, van Zwam WH, Dippel DWJ, Mitchell PJ, Demchuk AM, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet Lond Engl. 2016;387:1723–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saver JL, Goyal M, Bonafe A, Diener H-C, Levy EI, Pereira VM, et al. Solitaire™ with the intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke (SWIFT PRIME) trial: protocol for a randomized, controlled, multicenter study comparing the Solitaire revascularization device with IV tPA with IV tPA alone in acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke Off J Int Stroke Soc. 2015;10:439–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yarbrough CK, Ong CJ, Beyer AB, Lipsey K, Derdeyn CP. Endovascular thrombectomy for anterior circulation stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2015;46:3177–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kernan WN, Ovbiagele B, Black HR, Bravata DM, Chimowitz MI, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2014;45:2160–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    EPMA World Congress. Traditional Forum in Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine for Multi-Professional Consideration and Consolidation. EPMA J. 2017;8:1–54.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Věstník č. 8/2010 [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  16. 16.
    Věstník č. 2/2010 [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  17. 17.
    Věstník č. 10/2012 [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  18. 18.
    Věstník č. 11/2015 [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  19. 19.
    Berglund A, Svensson L, Wahlgren N, von Euler M, HASTA collaborators. Face arm speech time test use in the prehospital setting, better in the ambulance than in the emergency medical communication center. Cerebrovasc Dis Basel Switz. 2014;37:212–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Home - ESO Quality Registry [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  21. 21.
    De Raedt S, De Vos A, Van Binst A-M, De Waele M, Coomans D, Buyl R, et al. High natural killer cell number might identify stroke patients at risk of developing infections. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflammation. 2015;2:e71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Registries | SITS International [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  23. 23.
    Czech Health Statistics Yearbook | ÚZIS ČR [Internet]. [cited 2018 Mar 27]. Available from:
  24. 24.
    Eurostat [Internet]. [cited 2018 Sep 9]. Available from:
  25. 25.
    Maaijwee NAMM, Rutten-Jacobs LCA, Schaapsmeerders P, van Dijk EJ, de Leeuw F-E. Ischaemic stroke in young adults: risk factors and long-term consequences. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10:315–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thom V, Schmid S, Gelderblom M, Hackbusch R, Kolster M, Schuster S, et al. IL-17 production by CSF lymphocytes as a biomarker for cerebral vasculitis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflammation. 2016;3:e214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dorfler A. Comprehensive interventional stroke therapy: patient selection, interdisciplinary workflow aspects and state-of-the-art technique. 26. European Stroke Conference, 24 - 26 May, Berlin; 2017.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Smith EE, Kent DM, Bulsara KR, Leung LY, Lichtman JH, Reeves MJ, et al. Accuracy of prediction instruments for diagnosing large vessel occlusion in individuals with suspected stroke: a systematic review for the 2018 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2018;49:e111–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, Bonafe A, Budzik RF, Bhuva P, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Albers GW, Marks MP, Kemp S, Christensen S, Tsai JP, Ortega-Gutierrez S, et al. Thrombectomy for stroke at 6 to 16 hours with selection by perfusion imaging. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:708–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Krebs W, Sharkey-Toppen TP, Cheek F, Cortez E, Larrimore A, Keseg D, et al. Prehospital stroke assessment for large vessel occlusions: a systematic review. Prehospital Emerg Care Off J Natl Assoc EMS Physicians Natl Assoc State EMS Dir. 2018;22:180–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Polivka J, Kralickova M, Polivka J, Kaiser C, Kuhn W, Golubnitschaja O. Mystery of the brain metastatic disease in breast cancer patients: improved patient stratification, disease prediction and targeted prevention on the horizon? EPMA J. 2017;8:119–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Polivka J, Altun I, Golubnitschaja O. Pregnancy-associated breast cancer: the risky status quo and new concepts of predictive medicine. EPMA J. 2018;9:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hankey GJ. Secondary stroke prevention. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:178–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pastukhov A, Krisanova N, Maksymenko V, Borisova T. Personalized approach in brain protection by hypothermia: individual changes in non-pathological and ischemia-related glutamate transport in brain nerve terminals. EPMA J. 2016;7:26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Helms TM, Duong G, Zippel-Schultz B, Tilz RR, Kuck K-H, Karle CA. Prediction and personalised treatment of atrial fibrillation-stroke prevention: consolidated position paper of CVD professionals. EPMA J. 2014;5:15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brunner-La Rocca H-P, Fleischhacker L, Golubnitschaja O, Heemskerk F, Helms T, Hoedemakers T, et al. Challenges in personalised management of chronic diseases-heart failure as prominent example to advance the care process. EPMA J. 2015;7:2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Alamri Y. Current patterns of collaboration in published neurology research: author collaboration in neurological research. EPMA J. 2017;8:207–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (EPMA) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiri Polivka
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jiri PolivkaJr
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    Email author
  • Vladimir Rohan
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine in PilsenCharles UniversityPlzenCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyUniversity Hospital PilsenPlzenCzech Republic
  3. 3.Department of Histology and EmbryologyCharles UniversityPlzenCzech Republic
  4. 4.Biomedical Centre, Faculty of Medicine in PilsenCharles UniversityPlzenCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations