M Reiter1, Y Teuschl, K Matz, L Seyfang, M Brainin. 1. Department for Clinical Neurosciences and Preventive Medicine, Danube University, Krems, Austria; Department of Neurology, Danube Clinic Tulln, Tulln, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Diabetes is a predictor for poor outcome after thrombolysis in stroke patients, and early post-stroke glycaemia is associated with higher rates of post-thrombolytic symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhages (SICHs). Diabetic stroke patients may nevertheless profit from thrombolysis. Here, we compared outcome data of matched thrombolysed and non-thrombolysed diabetic and non-diabetic stroke patients from a national database. METHODS: The outcomes of 1079 matched quadruples, each consisting of a thrombolysed diabetic, a non-thrombolysed diabetic, a thrombolysed non-diabetic and a non-thrombolysed non-diabetic case (a total of 4316 cases), enrolled in the Austrian Stroke Unit Registry (2004-2013), were compared. Patients were matched according to sex, age, stroke severity, pre-stroke disability and prior stroke. RESULTS: A regression model with improvement as depending variable found no effect of diabetes (P = 0.158) or the interaction diabetes × thrombolysis (P = 0.507), whereas the effect of thrombolysis itself was highly significant (P < 0.001). Functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale) was significantly better in thrombolysed than in non-thrombolysed diabetic patients at discharge from the stroke-unit (P < 0.001) and 3 months later (P = 0.006). No significant differences were found in the number of SICHs after thrombolytic treatment between diabetic (4.9%) and non-diabetic strokes (3.5%). Both groups had a higher risk of SICH compared with the non-thrombolysed groups (diabetics 2.6%, non-diabetics 2.5%). Due to lack of documentation, the effect of admission blood glucose on SICH was not investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this nationwide survey show that diabetic stroke patients receive a substantial benefit from thrombolysis, and therefore diabetic strokes should not be excluded from thrombolytic treatment.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Diabetes is a predictor for poor outcome after thrombolysis in strokepatients, and early post-stroke glycaemia is associated with higher rates of post-thrombolytic symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhages (SICHs). Diabetic strokepatients may nevertheless profit from thrombolysis. Here, we compared outcome data of matched thrombolysed and non-thrombolysed diabetic and non-diabetic strokepatients from a national database. METHODS: The outcomes of 1079 matched quadruples, each consisting of a thrombolysed diabetic, a non-thrombolysed diabetic, a thrombolysed non-diabetic and a non-thrombolysed non-diabetic case (a total of 4316 cases), enrolled in the Austrian Stroke Unit Registry (2004-2013), were compared. Patients were matched according to sex, age, stroke severity, pre-stroke disability and prior stroke. RESULTS: A regression model with improvement as depending variable found no effect of diabetes (P = 0.158) or the interaction diabetes × thrombolysis (P = 0.507), whereas the effect of thrombolysis itself was highly significant (P < 0.001). Functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale) was significantly better in thrombolysed than in non-thrombolysed diabeticpatients at discharge from the stroke-unit (P < 0.001) and 3 months later (P = 0.006). No significant differences were found in the number of SICHs after thrombolytic treatment between diabetic (4.9%) and non-diabetic strokes (3.5%). Both groups had a higher risk of SICH compared with the non-thrombolysed groups (diabetics 2.6%, non-diabetics 2.5%). Due to lack of documentation, the effect of admission blood glucose on SICH was not investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this nationwide survey show that diabetic strokepatients receive a substantial benefit from thrombolysis, and therefore diabetic strokes should not be excluded from thrombolytic treatment.
Authors: E M Fanou; J Knight; R I Aviv; S-P Hojjat; S P Symons; L Zhang; M Wintermark Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sarah Gelhard; Roxane-Isabelle Kestner; Moritz Armbrust; Helmuth Steinmetz; Christian Foerch; Ferdinand O Bohmann Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-10 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Pitchaiah Mandava; Sharyl R Martini; Melody Munoz; William Dalmeida; Anand K Sarma; Jane A Anderson; Roderic H Fabian; Thomas A Kent Journal: Transl Stroke Res Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 6.829
Authors: Shihab Masrur; Margueritte Cox; Deepak L Bhatt; Eric E Smith; Gray Ellrodt; Gregg C Fonarow; Lee Schwamm Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 5.501