Nedeltchev Krassen, Schwegler Benjamin, Haefeli Tobias, Brekenfeld Caspar, Gralla Jan, Fischer Urs, Arnold Marcel, Remonda Luca, Schroth Gerhard, Mattle Heinrich P
Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Stroke. 2007 Sep;38(9):2531-5. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.482554. Epub 2007 Aug 2.
Acute ischemic stroke with mild or rapidly improving symptoms is expected to result in good functional outcome, whether treated or not. Therefore, thrombolysis with its potential risks does not seem to be justified in such patients. However, recent studies indicate that the outcome is not invariably benign.
We analyzed clinical and radiological data of patients with stroke who presented within 6 hours of stroke onset and did not receive thrombolysis because of mild or rapidly improving symptoms. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed to define predictors of clinical outcome.
One hundred sixty-two consecutive patients (110 men and 52 women) aged 63+/-13 years were included. The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score on admission was 2 (range, 1 to 14). All patients presented within 6 hours of symptom onset. After 3 months, modified Rankin Scale score was < or =1 in 122 patients (75%), indicating a favorable outcome. Thirty-eight patients (23.5%) had an unfavorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale 2 to 5) and 2 patients (1.3%) had died. Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score > or =10 points increased the odds of unfavorable outcome or death 16.9-fold (95% CI: 1.8 to 159.5; P<0.013), and proximal vessel occlusion increased the odds 7.13-fold (95% CI: 1.1 to 45.5; P<0.038).
Seventy-five percent of patients with mild or rapidly improving symptoms will have a favorable outcome after 3 months. Therefore, a decision against thrombolysis seems to be justified in the majority of patients. However, selected patients, especially those with proximal vessel occlusions and baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores >/=10 points, might derive a benefit from thrombolysis.
症状轻微或迅速改善的急性缺血性卒中,无论是否接受治疗,预期都会有良好的功能转归。因此,对于这类患者,具有潜在风险的溶栓治疗似乎并不合理。然而,近期研究表明,其转归并非总是良好。
我们分析了卒中发病6小时内就诊、因症状轻微或迅速改善而未接受溶栓治疗的患者的临床及影像学资料。进行单因素和逻辑回归分析以确定临床转归的预测因素。
纳入了162例连续患者(110例男性和52例女性),年龄63±13岁。入院时美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分中位数为2分(范围1至14分)。所有患者均在症状发作6小时内就诊。3个月后,122例患者(75%)改良Rankin量表评分≤1分,提示转归良好。38例患者(23.5%)转归不良(改良Rankin量表评分2至5分),2例患者(1.3%)死亡。基线NIHSS评分≥10分使不良转归或死亡几率增加16.9倍(95%可信区间:1.8至159.5;P<0.013),近端血管闭塞使几率增加7.13倍(95%可信区间:1.1至45.5;P<0.038)。
75%症状轻微或迅速改善的患者3个月后转归良好。因此,大多数患者不进行溶栓治疗似乎是合理的。然而,部分患者尤其是那些有近端血管闭塞且基线NIHSS评分≥10分的患者,可能从溶栓治疗中获益。