4.4 Article

Elevated serum urate concentration independently predicts poor outcome following stroke in patients with diabetes

期刊

DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 79-82

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.585

关键词

stroke; outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Type 2 diabetes is a risk factor for stroke and confers increased risk of poor outcome and further vascular events following stroke. Hyperuricaemia occurs commonly in patients with type 2 diabetes, but its significance as a predictor of outcome following stroke is uncertain. We sought to investigate the prognostic significance of elevated serum urate concentration in diabetic subjects following stroke. Methods We studied a cohort of type 2 diabetes patients presenting to our unit with computed tomography-confirmed acute stroke. Fasting blood samples were drawn within 24 h of admission for urate concentration and standard battery of biochemistry and hematological tests. information on age, stroke type, prior hypertension, smoking status, resolution time of symptoms and National Institutes of Health Stroke Score was collated. The main outcome event was time to myocardial infarction, recurrent stroke or vascular death as defined in the CAPRIE trial. Stepwise proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the effect of the above variables on event-free survival following stroke. Results One hundred and forty patients were studied. Median follow-up duration was 974 days (IQR 163 to 1830 days). Sixty-four patients suffered an outcome event. Urate levels of greater than 0.42 mmol/L (p < 0.001) and an increasing NIHSS score (p < 0.001) independently predicted increased likelihood of suffering an event. Conclusion Elevated urate concentration is significantly and independently associated with increased risk of future vascular events in diabetic stroke patients. Further studies to elucidate the mechanism of this observation are required. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.4
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