BACKGROUND: Stroke outcome studies often combine cases of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and ischemic stroke (IS). These studies of mixed stroke typically ignore computed tomography (CT) findings for ICH cases, though the impact of omitting these traditional predictors of ICH mortality is unknown. We investigated the incremental impact of ICH CT findings on mortality prediction model performance. METHODS: Cases of ICH and IS (2000-2003) were identified from the Brain Attack Surveillance in Corpus Christi (BASIC) project. Base models predicting 30-day mortality included demographics, stroke type, and clinical findings (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) +/- Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)). The impact of adding CT data (volume, intraventricular hemorrhage, infratentorial location) was assessed with the area under the curve (AUC), unweighted sum of squared residuals (Ŝ), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). The model assessment was performed first for the mixed case of IS and ICH, and then repeated for ICH cases alone to determine whether any lack of improvement in model performance with CT data for mixed stroke type was due to IS cases naturally forming a larger proportion of the total sample than ICH. RESULTS: A total of 1,256 cases were included (86% IS, 14% ICH). Thirty-day mortality was 16% overall (11% for IS; 43% for ICH). When both clinical scales (NIHSS and GCS) were included, none of the model performance measures showed improvement with the addition of CT findings whether considering IS and ICH together (ΔAUC: 0.002, 95% CI -0.01, 0.02; ΔŜ: -3.0, 95% CI -9.1, 2.6; IDI: 0.017, 95% CI -0.004, 0.05) or considering ICH cases alone (ΔAUC: 0.02, 95% CI -0.02, 0.08; ΔŜ: -2.0, 95% CI -9.7, 3.4; IDI 0.065, 95% CI -0.03, 0.21). If NIHSS was the only clinical scale included, there was still no improvement in AUC or Ŝ when CT findings were added for the sample with IS/ICH combined (ΔAUC: 0.005, 95% CI -0.01, 0.02; ΔŜ: -5.0, 95% CI -11.6, 1.0) or for ICH cases alone (ΔAUC: 0.05, 95% CI -0.002, 0.11; ΔŜ: -4.2, 95% CI -11.5, 2.3). However, IDI was improved when NIHSS was the only clinical scale for IS/ICH combined (IDI: 0.029, 95% CI 0.002, 0.065) and ICH alone (IDI: 0.12, 95% CI 0.005, 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Excluding ICH CT findings had only minimal impact on mortality prediction model performance whether examining ICH and IS together or ICH alone. These findings have important implications for the design of clinical studies involving ICH patients.
BACKGROUND:Stroke outcome studies often combine cases of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and ischemic stroke (IS). These studies of mixed stroke typically ignore computed tomography (CT) findings for ICH cases, though the impact of omitting these traditional predictors of ICH mortality is unknown. We investigated the incremental impact of ICH CT findings on mortality prediction model performance. METHODS: Cases of ICH and IS (2000-2003) were identified from the Brain Attack Surveillance in Corpus Christi (BASIC) project. Base models predicting 30-day mortality included demographics, stroke type, and clinical findings (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) +/- Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)). The impact of adding CT data (volume, intraventricular hemorrhage, infratentorial location) was assessed with the area under the curve (AUC), unweighted sum of squared residuals (Ŝ), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). The model assessment was performed first for the mixed case of IS and ICH, and then repeated for ICH cases alone to determine whether any lack of improvement in model performance with CT data for mixed stroke type was due to IS cases naturally forming a larger proportion of the total sample than ICH. RESULTS: A total of 1,256 cases were included (86% IS, 14% ICH). Thirty-day mortality was 16% overall (11% for IS; 43% for ICH). When both clinical scales (NIHSS and GCS) were included, none of the model performance measures showed improvement with the addition of CT findings whether considering IS and ICH together (ΔAUC: 0.002, 95% CI -0.01, 0.02; ΔŜ: -3.0, 95% CI -9.1, 2.6; IDI: 0.017, 95% CI -0.004, 0.05) or considering ICH cases alone (ΔAUC: 0.02, 95% CI -0.02, 0.08; ΔŜ: -2.0, 95% CI -9.7, 3.4; IDI 0.065, 95% CI -0.03, 0.21). If NIHSS was the only clinical scale included, there was still no improvement in AUC or Ŝ when CT findings were added for the sample with IS/ICH combined (ΔAUC: 0.005, 95% CI -0.01, 0.02; ΔŜ: -5.0, 95% CI -11.6, 1.0) or for ICH cases alone (ΔAUC: 0.05, 95% CI -0.002, 0.11; ΔŜ: -4.2, 95% CI -11.5, 2.3). However, IDI was improved when NIHSS was the only clinical scale for IS/ICH combined (IDI: 0.029, 95% CI 0.002, 0.065) and ICH alone (IDI: 0.12, 95% CI 0.005, 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Excluding ICH CT findings had only minimal impact on mortality prediction model performance whether examining ICH and IS together or ICH alone. These findings have important implications for the design of clinical studies involving ICHpatients.
Authors: Gregg C Fonarow; Mathew J Reeves; Eric E Smith; Jeffrey L Saver; Xin Zhao; Dai Wai Olson; Adrian F Hernandez; Eric D Peterson; Lee H Schwamm Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2010-02-22
Authors: Lynda D Lisabeth; Jan M H Risser; Devin L Brown; Fahmi Al-Senani; Ken Uchino; Melinda A Smith; Nelda Garcia; Paxton J Longwell; David A McFarling; Areej Al-Wabil; Olubumi Akuwumi; Lemuel A Moyé; Lewis B Morgenstern Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2005-08-08 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Veronique Guyomard; Robert A Fulcher; Oliver Redmayne; Anthony K Metcalf; John F Potter; Phyo K Myint Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: D B Zahuranec; N R Gonzales; D L Brown; L D Lisabeth; P J Longwell; S V Eden; M A Smith; N M Garcia; J T Hoff; L B Morgenstern Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Karen C Johnston; Douglas P Wagner; Xin-Qun Wang; George C Newman; Vincent Thijs; Souvik Sen; Steven Warach Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-04-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Clara Hjalmarsson; Lennart Bergfeldt; Lena Bokemark; Karin Manhem; Björn Andersson Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Alexander J George; Amelia K Boehme; Casey R Dunn; T Beasley; James E Siegler; Karen C Albright; Ramy El Khoury; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Darin B Zahuranec; Lynda D Lisabeth; Brisa N Sánchez; Melinda A Smith; Devin L Brown; Nelda M Garcia; Lesli E Skolarus; William J Meurer; James F Burke; Eric E Adelman; Lewis B Morgenstern Journal: Neurology Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Odera Umeano; Barbara Phillips-Bute; Claire E Hailey; Wei Sun; Marisa C Gray; Briana Roulhac-Wilson; David L McDonagh; Peter G Kranz; Daniel T Laskowitz; Michael L James Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marco Stein; Björn Misselwitz; Gerhard F Hamann; Malgorzata A Kolodziej; Marcus H T Reinges; Eberhard Uhl Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2016-03-27 Impact factor: 3.411