Sandercock P A, Allen C M, Corston R N, Harrison M J, Warlow C P
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985 Dec 14;291(6510):1675-7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6510.1675.
We tested the Guy's Hospital stroke diagnostic score using the clinical data from two independent samples of patients with acute stroke. These were 228 patients from the Oxfordshire community stroke project and 130 referred to the National Hospital for Nervous Diseases in London. The diagnosis was confirmed by computed tomography or necropsy in each case. The optimum cut off point on the clinical score for the differentiation of intracranial haemorrhage from infarction was found to be the same for both the patients in our study and those from whose data the score was derived originally. Set at this level, the score achieved a sensitivity for the diagnosis of haemorrhage of 81% and 88% in the patients from Oxford and London, respectively. In those from Oxford infarction was diagnosed with a sensitivity of 78% with an overall predictive accuracy of 78% with an overall London the sensitivity for infarction was also 78% with an overall predictive accuracy of 82%. When it is essential to exclude intracerebral blood before starting treatment in the small proportion of patients with stroke who require anticoagulation the Guy's Hospital score is not sufficiently accurate to replace computed tomography. The score is, however, the most accurate clinical means of differentiating haemorrhage from infarction as the cause of stroke. It is suggested that it should be used as a screening test in epidemiological studies and in large scale trials of low risk treatment for the secondary prevention of stroke when computed tomography in all cases is impracticable.
我们使用来自两个独立急性中风患者样本的临床数据,对盖伊医院中风诊断评分进行了测试。这些样本包括来自牛津郡社区中风项目的228名患者以及转诊至伦敦国立神经病医院的130名患者。每例患者的诊断均通过计算机断层扫描或尸检得以证实。我们发现,对于我们研究中的患者以及最初得出该评分所依据数据的患者而言,用于区分颅内出血与梗死的临床评分最佳切点是相同的。设定为此水平时,该评分在牛津患者和伦敦患者中诊断出血的敏感度分别为81%和88%。在牛津患者中,诊断梗死的敏感度为78%,总体预测准确率为78%;在伦敦患者中,诊断梗死的敏感度同样为78%,总体预测准确率为82%。对于一小部分需要抗凝治疗的中风患者,在开始治疗前必须排除脑内出血的情况下,盖伊医院评分的准确性不足以替代计算机断层扫描。然而,该评分是区分出血与梗死作为中风病因的最准确的临床方法。建议在流行病学研究以及中风二级预防低风险治疗大规模试验中,当对所有病例进行计算机断层扫描不可行时,将其用作筛查测试。