3.8 Article

The mean platelet volume and plateletcrit as predictors of short-term outcome of acute ischemic stroke

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s41983-018-0035-x

关键词

Mean platelet volume; Plateletcrit; Outcome; Stroke

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundActivation of the platelet plays an important role in the process of atherosclerosis. Mean platelet volume (MPV) is significantly associated with the poor outcome of acute ischemic stroke while the results of studies about the relationship between plateletcrit (PCT) and stroke outcome were inconsistent. The aim of this work is to determine whether an association exists between MPV and plateletcrit (PCT) and outcome of acute ischemic stroke.MethodsWe examined 157 patients with ischemic stroke, admitted to the Sohag University Hospital. The diagnosis of stroke was performed clinically according to The World Health Organization and confirmed by brain CT and MRI when needed. Platelet indices including MPV and PCT were assessed immediately (within 2h) after admission. After 3months, the functional outcome was assessed using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) with assessment of the relationship between platelet indices and stroke outcome.ResultsAbout 50% of the participants have favorable outcome. MPV was significantly higher in the unfavorable group (10.42.3 fL) than in the favorable one (8.7 +/- 1.3 fL) (P<0. 001). MPV was an independent predictor of poor short-term outcome of acute stroke after controlling for confounders like diabetes mellitus. The mean PCT was significantly higher in the unfavorable group (0.28 +/- 0.1%) than in the favorable one (0.25 +/- 0.1%) (P=0. 04) but not considered as an independent predictor of poor short-term outcome of acute stroke.Conclusions MPV and PCT were significantly correlated with poor functional outcome, only MPV was an independent predictor of poor short-term outcome of acute stroke after controlling for confounders like DM, and these platelet indices can be used as a prognostic tool.

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

3.8
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