4.6 Article

Higher Insulin Resistance Level is Associated with Worse Clinical Response in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Intravenous Thrombolysis

Journal

TRANSLATIONAL STROKE RESEARCH
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 167-171

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12975-016-0453-y

Keywords

Acute ischemic stroke; Recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA); Insulin; Homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance (HOMA-IR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Insulin resistance is linked to atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and stroke. We investigated whether there is a relationship between insulin resistance and clinical findings and outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis. In our study, 180 acute ischemic stroke non-diabetic patients treated with intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (iv rt-PA) were evaluated for insulin resistance assessed by homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). The threshold for HOMA-IR was determined as 2.7. Patients were grouped as HOMA-IR>2.7 and HOMA-IR <= 2.7. Clinical features at baseline, 24th hour, and 3rd month were examined. Computed tomography (CT) findings for hemorrhagic transformation were also assessed. Patients with HOMA-IR>2.7 had significantly higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores at 24th hour (p=0.005) and higher modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at 3rd month (p=0.011). Logistic regression analysis displayed that the presence of HOMAIR>2.7 increases the likelihood of poor outcome 2.93 times (confidence interval [CI] 1.001-1.079) (p=0.003). There was no statistically significant difference between baseline clinical features, hemorrhagic transformation (p=1.000), and mortality (p=0.350) rates. Insulin resistance at higher levels seems to be associated with poor clinical courses and outcomes in patients who received iv rt-PA.

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