Luiz Antonio Nasi1, Sheila Cristina Ouriques Martins2,3, Miguel Gus4, Gustavo Weiss2,3, Andrea Garcia de Almeida2,3, Rosane Brondani2,3, Letícia Costa Rebello2,3, Angélica DalPizzol2,3, Flávio Danni Fuchs4, Maria Júlia Monteiro Valença2,3, Letícia F Wirth2, Gerson Nunes2, Craig S Anderson5. 1. Vascular Unit, Emergency Department, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Ramiro Barcelos 2350, Porto Alegre, RS, CEP 90 035-903, Brazil. lnasi@terra.com.br. 2. Vascular Unit, Emergency Department, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Ramiro Barcelos 2350, Porto Alegre, RS, CEP 90 035-903, Brazil. 3. Stroke Division, Neurology Service, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 4. Hypertension Group, Cardiology Service, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 5. The George Institute for Global Health, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is uncertainty over the optimal level of systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the setting of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of the early manipulation of SBP in non-thrombolised patients. The key hypothesis under investigation was that clinical outcomes vary across ranges of SBP in AIS. METHODS:218 patients were randomized within 12 h of AIS to maintain the SBP during 24 h within three ranges: Group 1 140-160 mmHg, Group 2 161-180 mmHg or Group 3 181-200 mmHg. Vasoactive drugs and fluids were used to achieve these targets. Good outcome was defined as a modified Rankin score 0-2 at 90-days. RESULTS: The median SBP in the three groups in 24 h was: 153 mmHg, 163 mmHg, and 178 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.0001. Good clinical outcome did not differ among the different groups (51% vs 52% vs 39%, P = 0.27). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) was more frequent in the higher SBP range (1% vs 2.7% vs 9.1%, P = 0.048) with similar mortality rates. No patient had acute neurological deterioration related to the SBP reduction in the first 24 h. In our logistic regression analysis, the odds of having good clinical outcome was higher in Group 2 (OR 2.83) after adjusting for important confounders. Regardless of the assigned group, the probability of good outcome was 47% in patients who were manipulated to increase the BP, 42% to decrease and 62% in non-manipulated (P = 0.1). Adverse effects were limited to Group 2 (4%) and Group 3 (7.6%) and were associated with the use of norepinephrine (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Good outcome in 90 days was not significantly different among the 3 blood pressure ranges. After logistic regression analysis, the odds of having good outcome was greater in Group 2 (SBP 161-180 mmHg). SICH occurred more frequently in Group 3 (181-200 mmHg).
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: There is uncertainty over the optimal level of systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the setting of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of the early manipulation of SBP in non-thrombolised patients. The key hypothesis under investigation was that clinical outcomes vary across ranges of SBP in AIS. METHODS: 218 patients were randomized within 12 h of AIS to maintain the SBP during 24 h within three ranges: Group 1 140-160 mmHg, Group 2 161-180 mmHg or Group 3 181-200 mmHg. Vasoactive drugs and fluids were used to achieve these targets. Good outcome was defined as a modified Rankin score 0-2 at 90-days. RESULTS: The median SBP in the three groups in 24 h was: 153 mmHg, 163 mmHg, and 178 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.0001. Good clinical outcome did not differ among the different groups (51% vs 52% vs 39%, P = 0.27). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) was more frequent in the higher SBP range (1% vs 2.7% vs 9.1%, P = 0.048) with similar mortality rates. No patient had acute neurological deterioration related to the SBP reduction in the first 24 h. In our logistic regression analysis, the odds of having good clinical outcome was higher in Group 2 (OR 2.83) after adjusting for important confounders. Regardless of the assigned group, the probability of good outcome was 47% in patients who were manipulated to increase the BP, 42% to decrease and 62% in non-manipulated (P = 0.1). Adverse effects were limited to Group 2 (4%) and Group 3 (7.6%) and were associated with the use of norepinephrine (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Good outcome in 90 days was not significantly different among the 3 blood pressure ranges. After logistic regression analysis, the odds of having good outcome was greater in Group 2 (SBP 161-180 mmHg). SICH occurred more frequently in Group 3 (181-200 mmHg).
Authors: Dawn M Bravata; Shih-Yieh Ho; Lawrence M Brass; John Concato; Jeanne Scinto; Thomas P Meehan Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-02-20 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Nils Wahlgren; Niaz Ahmed; Antoni Dávalos; Gary A Ford; Martin Grond; Werner Hacke; Michael G Hennerici; Markku Kaste; Sonja Kuelkens; Vincent Larrue; Kennedy R Lees; Risto O Roine; Lauri Soinne; Danilo Toni; Geert Vanhooren Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-01-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: A E Hillis; J A Ulatowski; P B Barker; M Torbey; W Ziai; N J Beauchamp; S Oh; R J Wityk Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Werner Hacke; Geoffrey Donnan; Cesare Fieschi; Markku Kaste; Rüdiger von Kummer; Joseph P Broderick; Thomas Brott; Michael Frankel; James C Grotta; E Clarke Haley; Thomas Kwiatkowski; Steven R Levine; Chris Lewandowski; Mei Lu; Patrick Lyden; John R Marler; Suresh Patel; Barbara C Tilley; Gregory Albers; Erich Bluhmki; Manfred Wilhelm; Scott Hamilton Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-03-06 Impact factor: 79.321