Ann: Stage 2 Insights Confirm Diagnostic & Clinical Viability, page-36

My understanding is it's bleed vs. no bleed (at this stage). To localise/confirm a large vessel occlusion that is a target for endovascular clot retrieval (ECR), the standard today is a CT Stroke series - which consists of a non-contrast CT brain + CT angiogram (Aortic Arch to Circle of Willis) +/- CT perfusion. A CT Stroke series also needs IV contrast for the angiography phase.

I don't think the EMVision technology can be used to localise the site of a large vessel occlusion. But that isn't it's purpose, which is to exclude a haemorrhagic stroke (and presumably) allow for earlier administration of tPA.

My personal opinion is that its main use will be in the prehospital environment, mainly rurally - where time to CT is very long. In metropolitan emergency departments, the time to CT will be the same as time to emu, so there won't be much benefit in using the emu, when CT can be done (which will give you an angiogram to localise a large vessel occlusion if its present) as well as exclude a haemorrhagic stroke.

Another possible use for emu, could (potentially) be to rule out traumatic intracranial bleeds. E.g. old man on aspirin has an fall and a head strike. This universally gets a non-contrast CT brain. The emu scan would be a good option to triage high risk patients (e.g. high risk for a traumatic intracranial bleed)