Verified evidenceCoordination compressedExceptions only
Automated LVO detection with parallel transfer notification
Large-vessel occlusion at a non-thrombectomy primary stroke center has to be recognized and the receiving team activated through sequential imaging review and conventional communication before transfer can start.
Clinical operations · Greater Houston, Texas, United States
In a hub-and-spoke transfer workflow, the scarce resource is parallel activation, not a faster read of the same image. Moving LVO detection and team notification off the sequential critical path cut DIDO by more than an hour; the downstream treatment-rate claim did not survive adjustment and should not be sold as the result.
AI value · Primary-stroke-center door-in-door-out time (univariable median)
Verified
Median transfer time: 210 → 133 minutes
Observational pre/post design. Post-implementation n=35. Corresponding author reports consulting fees from Viz.AI outside the submitted work. Pre-AI median DIDO was long relative to some published networks, so effect size may not travel to faster centers.
Before
Receives a code-stroke patient and obtains noncontrast CT plus CTA under standard care. → Reviews CTA for large-vessel occlusion without an automated LVO alert. → Notifies the care team and arranges emergent transfer to a comprehensive stroke center after LVO is recognized.
After
Receives a code-stroke patient; NCCT and CTA are acquired under the same standard-of-care protocols. → Analyzes CTA for LVO in under five minutes on average and alerts the care-team mobile app. → Verifies the mobile PACS finding, messages the care team, and transfers eligible patients.
Human boundary
Humans retain transfer and EVT-eligibility decisions. The model does not independently dispatch the patient; clinicians must confirm imaging because positive predictive value is 0.65.
Why it matters
Transfer activation does not need to wait for sequential communication.
How the work changed
Before
How the work ran before the change.
Step 1 of 3
Emergency and telestroke team
Receives a code-stroke patient and obtains noncontrast CT plus CTA under standard care.
ControlInstitutional stroke order sets and imaging protocols
Step 2 of 3
Radiology / interpreting clinician
Reviews CTA for large-vessel occlusion without an automated LVO alert.
ControlConventional PACS interpretation
Step 3 of 3
Stroke and transfer coordinators
Notifies the care team and arranges emergent transfer to a comprehensive stroke center after LVO is recognized.
ControlPhone and conventional messaging; transfer eligibility judged by humans
What changed
Transfer activation does not need to wait for sequential communication.
Decision rightAI alerts in parallel; clinicians verify and govern transfer
After
How the same work runs now.
Step 1 of 3
Emergency and telestroke team
Receives a code-stroke patient; NCCT and CTA are acquired under the same standard-of-care protocols.
ControlAutomatic image transmission from all ED stroke workups
Step 2 of 3
Viz.AI LVO algorithm
Analyzes CTA for LVO in under five minutes on average and alerts the care-team mobile app.
Verifies the mobile PACS finding, messages the care team, and transfers eligible patients.
ControlHuman confirmation of imaging and treatment eligibility; AI does not independently authorize transfer
Process model built from the published workflow evidence for Greater Houston primary stroke centers. Every step, actor, and control appears in full below.Every step, actor, and control
Exception path
False-positive alerts are discarded after human image review. Patients without LVO, in-hospital code strokes, and inbound transfers were outside this workflow. Nighttime evaluations at all seven sites used telestroke.
Decision authority
Humans retain transfer and EVT-eligibility decisions. The model does not independently dispatch the patient; clinicians must confirm imaging because positive predictive value is 0.65.
Before
#
Actor
Action
Control
01
Emergency and telestroke team
Receives a code-stroke patient and obtains noncontrast CT plus CTA under standard care.
Institutional stroke order sets and imaging protocols
02
Radiology / interpreting clinician
Reviews CTA for large-vessel occlusion without an automated LVO alert.
Conventional PACS interpretation
03
Stroke and transfer coordinators
Notifies the care team and arranges emergent transfer to a comprehensive stroke center after LVO is recognized.
Phone and conventional messaging; transfer eligibility judged by humans
After
#
Actor
Action
Control
01
Emergency and telestroke team
Receives a code-stroke patient; NCCT and CTA are acquired under the same standard-of-care protocols.
Automatic image transmission from all ED stroke workups
02
Viz.AI LVO algorithm
Analyzes CTA for LVO in under five minutes on average and alerts the care-team mobile app.
Published algorithm performance NPV 0.99, PPV 0.65; humans must verify imaging
03
Stroke clinicians
Verifies the mobile PACS finding, messages the care team, and transfers eligible patients.
Human confirmation of imaging and treatment eligibility; AI does not independently authorize transfer
Work that left the path
Waiting for sequential CTA interpretation before any care-team notification can start
Assembling the transfer team through conventional phone and pager chains as the primary activation path
Human role before
Identify LVO on CTA and sequentially activate the transfer pathway through conventional interpretation and communication.
Human role after
Verify the automated LVO alert, confirm imaging, and govern transfer eligibility while the care team is notified in parallel.
AI role
Detect suspected LVO from CTA, push an alert, and provide a shared mobile PACS and messaging channel so activation is no longer gated on sequential phone-tree notification.
Outcomes
Primary-stroke-center door-in-door-out time (univariable median)
1 January 2021 to 27 February 2022 · 115 LVO patients transferred from 7 Greater Houston PSCs (80 pre-AI, 35 post-AI)
Observational pre/post design. Post-implementation n=35. Corresponding author reports consulting fees from Viz.AI outside the submitted work. Pre-AI median DIDO was long relative to some published networks, so effect size may not travel to faster centers.
Adjusted DIDO time (multivariable linear regression)
Verified
Pre-AI DIDO in the same cohort→106-minute reduction (95% CI −165 to −48); p<0.001
1 January 2021 to 27 February 2022 · 115 LVO patients at 7 PSCs; model adjusted only for sex and on/off hours
Wide confidence interval. Adjustment covariates were limited. A secular-trend test found no significant DIDO decline over calendar time (coefficient −0.05, 95% CI −0.33 to 0.23), which argues against unexplained process improvement as the whole explanation but does not prove causality. EVT after transfer rose 41.2% to 62.9% univariably (p=0.033) and was not significant after adjustment (OR 2.13, 95% CI 0.88–5.13); that secondary outcome is excluded from this catalog case.
What leaders can reuse
Anti-pattern
Publishing a vendor percentage from a bundled quality-improvement program as if it were the isolated effect of the detection model, or treating a non-significant adjusted EVT-rate change as a confirmed clinical outcome.
Questions
01Which notification still sits on the sequential critical path after the model fires?
02If the secondary clinical endpoint is not significant after adjustment, what operating metric is actually the decision-relevant outcome?
03How will false positives be handled when the model's positive predictive value is 0.65?
Portability conditions
CTA already obtained on all code-stroke patients as standard of care
A named receiving CSC and an existing transfer protocol
Clinicians required to verify imaging because model PPV is far from 1.0
Baseline DIDO long enough that a 100-minute shift is operationally available
Reputation risk
medium
Evidence and authority
What the public record supports.
Current · updated
4 peer reviewed; publication outcomes are verified.
Bundle 1.0.0 · reviewed 2026-09-06 · stable ID 8e195367ffc0725c
