BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The potential detrimental effect of diabetes mellitus and admission glucose level (AGL) on outcomes after stroke thrombolysis is unclear. We evaluated outcomes of patients treated by intravenous and/or intra-arterial therapy, according to diabetes mellitus and AGL. METHODS: We analyzed data from a patient registry (n=704) and conducted a systematic review of previous observational studies. The primary study outcome was the percentage of patients who achieved a favorable outcome (modified Rankin score ≤2 at 3 months). RESULTS: We identified 54 previous reports that evaluated the effect of diabetes mellitus or AGL on outcomes after thrombolysis. In an unadjusted meta-analysis that included our registry data and previous available observational data, diabetes mellitus was associated with less favorable outcome (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.79) and more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.21-1.56). However, in multivariable analysis, diabetes mellitus remained associated with less favorable outcome (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69-0.87) but not with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83-1.48). In unadjusted and in adjusted meta-analysis, higher AGL was associated with less favorable outcome and more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage; the adjusted OR (95% CI) per 1 mmol/L increase in AGL was 0.92 (0.90-0.94) for favorable outcome, and 1.09 (1.04-1.14) for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that AGL and history of diabetes mellitus are associated with poor clinical outcome after thrombolysis. AGL may be a surrogate marker of brain infarction severity rather than a causal factor. However, randomized controlled evidences are needed to address the significance of a tight glucose control during thrombolysis on clinical outcome.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The potential detrimental effect of diabetes mellitus and admission glucose level (AGL) on outcomes after stroke thrombolysis is unclear. We evaluated outcomes of patients treated by intravenous and/or intra-arterial therapy, according to diabetes mellitus and AGL. METHODS: We analyzed data from a patient registry (n=704) and conducted a systematic review of previous observational studies. The primary study outcome was the percentage of patients who achieved a favorable outcome (modified Rankin score ≤2 at 3 months). RESULTS: We identified 54 previous reports that evaluated the effect of diabetes mellitus or AGL on outcomes after thrombolysis. In an unadjusted meta-analysis that included our registry data and previous available observational data, diabetes mellitus was associated with less favorable outcome (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.79) and more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.21-1.56). However, in multivariable analysis, diabetes mellitus remained associated with less favorable outcome (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69-0.87) but not with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83-1.48). In unadjusted and in adjusted meta-analysis, higher AGL was associated with less favorable outcome and more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage; the adjusted OR (95% CI) per 1 mmol/L increase in AGL was 0.92 (0.90-0.94) for favorable outcome, and 1.09 (1.04-1.14) for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that AGL and history of diabetes mellitus are associated with poor clinical outcome after thrombolysis. AGL may be a surrogate marker of brain infarction severity rather than a causal factor. However, randomized controlled evidences are needed to address the significance of a tight glucose control during thrombolysis on clinical outcome.
Authors: Karen C Johnston; Askiel Bruno; Qi Pauls; Christiana E Hall; Kevin M Barrett; William Barsan; Amy Fansler; Katrina Van de Bruinhorst; Scott Janis; Valerie L Durkalski-Mauldin Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: D E Rivera-Aponte; M P Méndez-González; A F Rivera-Pagán; Y V Kucheryavykh; L Y Kucheryavykh; S N Skatchkov; M J Eaton Journal: Neuroscience Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 3.590