4.7 Article

Dynamic Cerebral Autoregulation Is an Independent Functional Outcome Predictor of Mild Acute Ischemic Stroke

期刊

STROKE
卷 49, 期 11, 页码 2605-2611

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.022481

关键词

arterial pressure; autoregulation; blood pressure; infarction; odds ratio; stroke

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan [MOST 106-2314-B-038-001, MOST 104-2314-B-038-021-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose Cerebral autoregulation is impaired in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether dynamic cerebral autoregulation (dCA) indices constitute an independent functional outcome predictor of acute ischemic stroke. Methods In this study, 86 patients at days 3 to 7 after acute ischemic stroke and 40 age- and sex-matched controls were enrolled for assessing their dCA indices under spontaneous hemodynamic fluctuations. The dCA indices of patients with favorable outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score 1 at 3 months, n=65), patients with unfavorable outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score 2 at 3 months, n=21), and controls were compared. Results The dCA indices, namely the phase shift at very low frequency band (phase_VLF), in the patients with unfavorable outcomes were significantly worse than those in the patients with favorable outcomes. However, the phase_VLF in the patients with favorable outcomes did not differ from those in the controls. Impaired dCA was associated with elevated mean arterial pressure and large infarction volume but was also present in patients with normal mean arterial pressure or small infarction volume. Phase_VLF was a predictor of outcomes in the receiver operating characteristic analysis (area under the curve: 0.722; P<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a phase_VLF value of <61 degrees was independently associated with unfavorable outcomes (odds ratio=4.90; P=0.024). Conclusions Phase_VLF is an independent functional outcome predictor of acute ischemic stroke.

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