4.6 Article

Prognostic Value of Mannose-Binding Lectin: 90-Day Outcome in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke

Journal

MOLECULAR NEUROBIOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 1, Pages 230-239

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12035-014-8682-0

Keywords

Mannose-binding lectin; Stroke; Short term; Prognosis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Complement activation and inflammation have been suggested in the pathogenesis of stroke; mannose-binding lectin (MBL) was found to have roles during the process. We therefore evaluated the short-term prognostic value of serum MBL in Chinese patients with an acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Consecutive AIS patients admitted to the emergency department were identified. Clinical information was collected. Serum concentration of MBL and NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was measured at the time of admission. Short-term functional outcome was measured by modified Rankin scale (mRS) 90 days after admission. Multivariate analyses were performed using logistic regression models. During the inclusion period, 231 patients were diagnosed with AIS, and 220 completed follow-up. The results indicated that the serum MBL levels were significantly (P = 0.000) higher in acutely ischemic stroke patients as compared with normal controls. MBL was an independent prognostic marker of short-term functional outcome and death (odds ratio (OR) 5.28 (2.88-10.67) and 6.99 (3.55-13.97), respectively, P = 0.000 for both, adjusted for NIHSS, other predictors, and vascular risk factors) in patients with AIS. MBL improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the NIHSS score for functional outcome from 0.826 (95 % CI 0.773-0.879) to 0.857 (95 % CI 0.808-0.905, P = 0.000) and for mortality from 0.768 (95 % CI 0.682-0.853) to 0.822 (95 % CI 0.747-0.896, P = 0.000). Serum MBL levels are a useful, complementary tool to predict functional outcome and mortality 90 days after stroke.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available