4.7 Article

Brachial-Ankle Pulse Wave Velocity for Predicting Functional Outcome in Acute Stroke

期刊

STROKE
卷 45, 期 8, 页码 2305-2310

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.005576

关键词

prognosis; pulse wave analysis; stroke

资金

  1. Korea Healthcare Technology Research and Development Project, Ministry for Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [HI10C2020, HI08C2149]
  2. Korea Health Promotion Institute [HI10C2020990014] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose-We investigated whether the brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) has prognostic value for predicting functional outcome after acute cerebral infarction and whether the prognostic value differs between stroke subtypes. Methods-We included 1091 consecutive patients with first-ever acute cerebral infarction who underwent baPWV measurements. Stroke subtypes were classified using the Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment classification. Poor functional outcomes were defined as modified Rankin Scale score >2 at 3 months after stroke onset. Results-We noted that 181 (16.59%) patients had a poor functional outcome. In multivariate logistic regression, patients in the highest tertile of baPWV (>22.25 m/s) were found to be at increased risk for poor functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-3.40) compared with those in the lowest tertile (<17.55 m/s). No significant interaction between baPWV and stroke subtype was noted. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that the addition of baPWV to the prediction model significantly improved the discrimination ability for poor functional outcome. Conclusions-baPWV has an independent prognostic value for predicting functional outcome after acute cerebral infarction. The prognostic value did not differ according to the stroke subtype.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据