OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association between patient age and good functional outcome after ischemic stroke with special focus on young patients who were numerically underrepresented in previous evaluations. METHODS: Of 43,163 ischemic stroke patients prospectively enrolled in the Austrian Stroke Unit Registry, 6,084 (14.1%) were ≤55 years old. Functional outcome was available in a representative subsample of 14,256 patients free of prestroke disability, 2,223 of whom were 55 years or younger. Herein we analyzed the effects of age on good functional outcome 3 months after stroke (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2). RESULTS: Good outcome was achieved in 88.2% (unadjusted probability) of young stroke patients (≤55 years). In multivariable analysis, age emerged as a significant predictor of outcome independent of stroke severity, etiology, performance of thrombolysis, sex, risk factors, and stroke complications. When the age stratum 56-65 years was used as a reference, odds ratios (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) of good outcome were 3.4 (1.9-6.4), 2.2 (1.6-3.2), and 1.5 (1.2-1.9) for patients aged 18-35, 36-45, and 46-55 years and 0.70 (0.60-0.81), 0.32 (0.28-0.37), and 0.18 (0.14-0.22) for those aged 66-75, 76-85, and >85 years (p < 0.001). In absolute terms, the regression-adjusted probability of good outcome was highest in the age group 18-35 years and gradually declined by 3.1%-4.2% per decade until age 75 with a steep drop thereafter. Findings applied equally to sexes and patients with and without IV thrombolysis or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Age emerged as a highly significant inverse predictor of good functional outcome after ischemic stroke independent of stroke severity, characteristics, and complications with the age-outcome association exhibiting a nonlinear scale and extending to young stroke patients.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association between patient age and good functional outcome after ischemic stroke with special focus on young patients who were numerically underrepresented in previous evaluations. METHODS: Of 43,163 ischemic strokepatients prospectively enrolled in the Austrian Stroke Unit Registry, 6,084 (14.1%) were ≤55 years old. Functional outcome was available in a representative subsample of 14,256 patients free of prestroke disability, 2,223 of whom were 55 years or younger. Herein we analyzed the effects of age on good functional outcome 3 months after stroke (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2). RESULTS: Good outcome was achieved in 88.2% (unadjusted probability) of young strokepatients (≤55 years). In multivariable analysis, age emerged as a significant predictor of outcome independent of stroke severity, etiology, performance of thrombolysis, sex, risk factors, and stroke complications. When the age stratum 56-65 years was used as a reference, odds ratios (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) of good outcome were 3.4 (1.9-6.4), 2.2 (1.6-3.2), and 1.5 (1.2-1.9) for patients aged 18-35, 36-45, and 46-55 years and 0.70 (0.60-0.81), 0.32 (0.28-0.37), and 0.18 (0.14-0.22) for those aged 66-75, 76-85, and >85 years (p < 0.001). In absolute terms, the regression-adjusted probability of good outcome was highest in the age group 18-35 years and gradually declined by 3.1%-4.2% per decade until age 75 with a steep drop thereafter. Findings applied equally to sexes and patients with and without IV thrombolysis or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Age emerged as a highly significant inverse predictor of good functional outcome after ischemic stroke independent of stroke severity, characteristics, and complications with the age-outcome association exhibiting a nonlinear scale and extending to young strokepatients.
Authors: Annastazia E Learoyd; Lisa Woodhouse; Laurence Shaw; Nikola Sprigg; Daniel Bereczki; Eivind Berge; Valeria Caso; Hanne Christensen; Ronan Collins; Anna Czlonkowska; Anwar El Etribi; Tracy D Farr; John Gommans; Ann-Charlotte Laska; George Ntaios; Serefnur Ozturk; Stuart J Pocock; Kameshwar Prasad; Joanna M Wardlaw; Kevin C Fone; Philip M Bath; Rebecca C Trueman Journal: Transl Stroke Res Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 6.829
Authors: Narayanaswamy Venketasubramanian; Chun Fan Lee; Sherry H Young; San San Tay; Thirugnanam Umapathi; Annabelle Y Lao; Herminigildo H Gan; Alejandro C Baroque Ii; Jose C Navarro; Hui Meng Chang; Joel M Advincula; Sombat Muengtaweepongsa; Bernard P L Chan; Carlos L Chua; Nirmala Wijekoon; H Asita de Silva; John Harold B Hiyadan; Nijasri C Suwanwela; K S Lawrence Wong; Niphon Poungvarin; Gaik Bee Eow; Christopher L H Chen Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Noortje A M M Maaijwee; Loes C A Rutten-Jacobs; Pauline Schaapsmeerders; Ewoud J van Dijk; Frank-Erik de Leeuw Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Dimitry S Davydow; Catherine L Hough; Deborah A Levine; Kenneth M Langa; Theodore J Iwashyna Journal: Am J Med Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Yasir Abdul; Mohammed Abdelsaid; Weiguo Li; R Clinton Webb; Jennifer C Sullivan; Guangkuo Dong; Adviye Ergul Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2018-06-16 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: Jerzy P Szaflarski; Jane B Allendorfer; Christi Banks; Jennifer Vannest; Scott K Holland Journal: Restor Neurol Neurosci Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.406