Libman R B, Kwiatkowski T G, Hansen M D, Clarke W R, Woolson R F, Adams H P
Department of Neurology, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Long Island Campus, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY 11040, USA.
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2001;11(4):311-6. doi: 10.1159/000047659.
Clinicians have tended to view anterior circulation (AC) and posterior circulation (PC) strokes as separate entities, with different underlying pathogenesis, natural histories, and potential responsiveness to interventions such as anticoagulation. We sought to explore differences between AC and PC stroke in the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST).
For patients enrolled in TOAST, prospective clinical information was collected including outcome at 3 months. Data on vascular distribution were obtained from the clinical impression of the investigators. Group comparisons for categorical data were performed using Fisher's exact test. Independent sample t tests and analysis of covariance were used for all continuous data.
The analysis included 1,039 patients with AC stroke and 180 patients with PC stroke. There were fewer women in the PC than in the AC groups, but otherwise there were no differences in demographics, risk factors or stroke subtypes between the two groups. Headache (AC 8.7%, PC 15%, p = 0.013) and vomiting (AC 3.5%, PC 17.8%, p < 0.001) were more common among PC patients. Mean baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score was lower (less severe) among PC (6.1) than AC patients (9.5; p < 0.001). On univariate analysis, favorable outcome at 3 months was more common for PC patients in both the placebo group (PC 82%, AC 71%, p = 0.04) and heparinoid group (PC 87%, AC 73%, p = 0.005). However, multivariate analysis, controlling for gender, history of previous stroke and baseline NIHSS score, showed no difference in outcome between PC and AC stroke. For favorable outcome, there was no interaction between vascular distribution and treatment category, suggesting that the effect of heparinoid did not differ between PC and AC strokes.
Patients with PC stroke seem to have a better long-term outcome than do AC patients, but this difference is no longer apparent when controlling for important prognostic variables. PC patients did not show any particular benefit from anticoagulation, and the efficacy of heparinoid did not vary between AC and PC stroke. While AC and PC patients do differ in some respects, it may be inappropriate to single out PC patients for anticoagulant treatment.
临床医生倾向于将前循环(AC)和后循环(PC)卒中视为不同的实体,认为它们具有不同的潜在发病机制、自然病程以及对抗凝等干预措施的潜在反应性。我们试图在急性卒中治疗中组织纤溶酶原激活剂-10172(ORG 10172)试验(TOAST)中探究AC和PC卒中之间的差异。
对于纳入TOAST的患者,收集前瞻性临床信息,包括3个月时的结局。血管分布数据来自研究者的临床判断。分类数据的组间比较采用Fisher精确检验。所有连续数据采用独立样本t检验和协方差分析。
分析纳入了1039例AC卒中患者和180例PC卒中患者。PC组女性患者少于AC组,但两组在人口统计学、危险因素或卒中亚型方面无其他差异。头痛(AC组8.7%,PC组15%,p = 0.013)和呕吐(AC组3.5%,PC组17.8%,p < 0.001)在PC患者中更常见。PC患者的平均基线美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分(6.1)低于AC患者(9.5;p < 0.001)(病情较轻)。单因素分析显示,在安慰剂组(PC组82%,AC组71%,p = 0.04)和类肝素组(PC组87%,AC组73%,p = 0.005)中,PC患者3个月时获得良好结局更为常见。然而,在对性别、既往卒中史和基线NIHSS评分进行校正的多因素分析中,PC卒中和AC卒中的结局无差异。对于良好结局,血管分布和治疗类别之间没有交互作用,这表明类肝素对PC卒中和AC卒中的疗效没有差异。
PC卒中患者似乎比AC卒中患者有更好的长期结局,但在控制重要的预后变量后,这种差异不再明显。PC患者未显示出抗凝治疗的任何特殊益处,类肝素在AC卒中和PC卒中中的疗效无差异。虽然AC和PC卒中患者在某些方面存在差异,但单独将PC卒中患者挑选出来进行抗凝治疗可能并不合适。