4.3 Article

Prior Cannabis Use Is Associated with Outcome after Intracerebral Hemorrhage

期刊

CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
卷 41, 期 5-6, 页码 248-255

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000443532

关键词

Intracerebral hemorrhage; Cannabinoids; Marijuana; Cannabis; Stroke; Prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Recent evidence suggests that a potential harmful relationship exists between cannabis use and ischemic stroke. The purpose of this study was to determine the implications of cannabis use in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients. Methods: An analysis of an international, multicenter, observational database of consecutive patients with spontaneous ICH was conducted. We extracted the following characteristics on presentation: demographics, risk factors, antiplatelet or anticoagulant use, Glasgow Coma Scale, ICH score, neuroimaging parameters, and urine toxicology screen (UTS) results. Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score was utilized for determination of outcome at discharge. Adjusted logistic ordinal regression was used as shift analysis to assess the impact of cannabis use on mRS score at discharge. The adjusted common OR measured the likelihood that cannabis use would lead to lower mRS scores. Results: Within a cohort of 725 spontaneous ICH patients, UTS was positive for cannabinoids in 8.6%. Cannabinoids-positive (CB+) patients were more frequently Caucasian (p < 0.001), younger (p < 0.001), and had lower median ICH scores on admission (p = 0.017) than those who were cannabinoids-negative. CB+ patients also showed a shift toward better outcome in the distribution of mRS categories, with an adjusted common OR of 0.544 (95% CI 0.330-0.895, p = 0.017). Conclusion: In this multinational cohort, cannabis use was discovered in nearly 10% of patients with spontaneous ICH. Although there was no relationship between cannabis use and specific ICH characteristics, CB+ patients had milder ICH presentation and less disability at discharge. (C) 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel

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

4.3
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