| Literature DB >> 33937400 |
YanQin Lu1, QianQian Bi1, Wang Fu1, LiLi Liu2, Yin Zhang3, XiaoYu Zhou1, Jue Wang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is hard to differentiate transient symptoms associated with infarction (TSI) from transient ischemic stroke (TIA) without MRI in the early onset. However, they have distinct clinical outcomes and respond differently to therapeutics. Therefore, we aimed to develop a risk prediction model based on the clinical features to identify TSI.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33937400 PMCID: PMC8062161 DOI: 10.1155/2021/5597155
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients.
| Variables | TIA ( | TSI ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Gender (male, %) | 70 (51.9) | 66 (69.5) | 0.007 |
| Age (years) | 65 (59.73) | 64 (58.71) | 0.516 |
|
| |||
| Duration of TIA (min) | 10 (3.60) | 30 (9.60) | 0.011 |
| Frequency in 24 h (%) 1 | 112 (83.6) | 70 (73.7) | 0.097 |
| ≥2 | 22 (16.4) | 25 (26.3) | |
| SBPa (mmHg) | 144.73 ± 20.65 | 155.14 ± 25.34 | 0.001 |
| DBPa (mmHg) | 83.45 ± 12.36 | 87.23 ± 12.85 | 0.026 |
|
| |||
| Unilateral weakness (%) | 68 (50.4) | 69 (72.6) | 0.001 |
| Numbness or tingling (%) | 41 (30.4) | 33 (34.7) | 0.579 |
| Speech impairment (%) | 29 (21.5) | 37 (38.9) | 0.006 |
| Diplopia (%) | 2 (1.5) | 0 (0) | 0.513 |
| Dizzy (%) | 43 (31.9) | 22 (23.2) | 0.196 |
| Unconsciousness (%) | 9 (6.7) | 4 (4.2) | 0.566 |
| Bilateral amaurosis, hemianopia (%) | 11 (8.1) | 4 (4.2) | 0.286 |
| Memory loss (%) | 20 (14.8) | 5 (5.3) | 0.030 |
| Facial paralysis (%) | 7 (5.2) | 12 (12.6) | 0.053 |
| Torpor (%) | 6 (4.4) | 4 (4.2) | 1.000 |
| Unilateral amaurosis (%) | 5 (3.7) | 0 (0) | 0.079 |
| Weakness of upper limbs (%) | 10 (7.4) | 3 (3.2) | 0.248 |
|
| |||
| Hypertension (%) | 91 (67.4) | 64 (67.4) | 1.000 |
| Diabetes mellitus (%) | 32 (23.7) | 26 (27.4) | 0.634 |
| Atrial fibrillation (%) | 4 (3.0) | 12 (12.6) | 0.007 |
| Hyperlipidemia (%) | 27 (20.0) | 19 (20.0) | 1.000 |
| Stroke (%) | 21 (15.6) | 17 (17.9) | 0.772 |
| TIA (%) | 48 (35.6) | 33 (34.7) | 1.000 |
| Dual TIAa (%) | 28 (20.7) | 28 (29.5) | 0.173 |
| Coronary heart disease (%) | 10 (7.4) | 7 (7.4) | 1.000 |
| Tumor (%) | 6 (4.4) | 5 (5.3) | 0.776 |
| Renal insufficiency (%) | 8 (5.9) | 2 (2.1) | 0.202 |
| Smoking (%) | 33 (24.4) | 46 (48.4) | <0.001 |
| Drinking (%) | 19 (14.1) | 24 (25.3) | 0.049 |
|
| |||
| Antiplatelet drugs (%) | 18 (13.3) | 8 (8.4) | 0.344 |
| Statins (%) | 10 (7.4) | 3 (3.2) | 0.278 |
| Anticoagulants (%) | 1 (1.1) | 1 (0.7) | 1.000 |
|
| |||
| ABCD2 | 3 (2.4) | 4 (3.5) | <0.001 |
| ABCD3 | 4 (2.5) | 5 (4.6) | <0.001 |
PMH: past medical history; SBPa: the first systolic blood pressure after admission; DBPa: the first diastolic blood pressure after admission; dual TIAa prompting medical attention plus at least one other TIA in the preceding 7 days.
Biomarker and imaging characteristics.
| Variables | TIA ( | TSI ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| CRP (mg/L) | 3.02 (3.02, 3.23) | 3.02 (3.02, 3.40) | 0.306 |
| NSE (ng/ml) | 14.27 (12.72, 16.38) | 14.18 (12.88, 16.71) | 0.484 |
| Folic acid (ng/ml) | 7.18 (5.63, 9.63) | 7.24 (5.22, 9.68) | 0.763 |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.85 (5.68, 6.25) | 5.90 (5.60, 6.33) | 0.700 |
| ALT (U/L) | 17.80 (10.80, 25.95) | 17.10 (11.00, 23.30) | 0.473 |
| CR ( | 69.50 (59.60, 83.98) | 76.90 (66.95, 85.24) | 0.008 |
| UA ( | 317.71 ± 75.57 | 346.82 ± 80.94 | 0.006 |
| FBG (mmol/L) | 5.10 (4.60, 5.55) | 5.10 (4.80, 5.55) | 0.195 |
| AST (U/L) | 18.00 (15.05, 23.35) | 17.20 (14.65, 21.70) | 0.283 |
| TC (mmol/L) | 4.16 ± 1.11 | 4.50 ± 0.94 | 0.015 |
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.27 (0.90, 1.65) | 1.36 (1.07, 1.72) | 0.175 |
| HDL (mmol/L) | 1.10 (0.94, 1.33) | 1.05 (0.90, 1.25) | 0.260 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 2.39 ± 0.89 | 2.83 ± 0.82 | <0.001 |
| Calcium (mmol/L) | 2.27 (2.22, 2.32) | 2.26 (2.21, 2.31) | 0.287 |
| Hcy ( | 11.30 (9.45, 11.89) | 11.20 (9.20, 15.15) | 0.772 |
| Fib (g/L) | 2.59 (2.33, 3.05) | 2.56 (2.38, 2.99) | 0.837 |
| D-dimer (mg/L) | 0.28 (0.22, 0.46) | 0.29 (0.22, 0.46) | 0.614 |
| NT-pro-BNP (pg/ml) | 75.07 (31.04, 138.75) | 99.42 (52.76, 239.55) | 0.007 |
| WBC (∗109/L) | 6.20 (5.24, 7.42) | 6.38 (5.34, 7.58) | 0.544 |
| RBC (∗1012/L) | 4.38 ± 0.54 | 4.56 ± 0.48 | 0.010 |
| Hemoglobin (g/L) | 133.27 ± 15.94 | 138.13 ± 15.77 | 0.023 |
| Hematocrit (%) | 40.19 ± 4.58 | 41.58 ± 4.34 | 0.022 |
| PTL (∗109/L) | 216 (185, 254) | 221 (176, 262) | 0.853 |
| Neutrophil (%) | 3.50 (2.91, 4.55) | 3.79 (3.13, 4.56) | 0.172 |
| Lymphocyte (%) | 1.92 (1.55, 2.40) | 1.89 (1.52, 2.20) | 0.311 |
| NLR | 1.79 (1.36, 2.42) | 2.02 (1.51, 2.65) | 0.069 |
| MPV (fL) | 10.81 ± 0.96 | 10.80 ± 0.96 | 0.920 |
| PCT (%) | 0.23 (0.19, 0.28) | 0.23 (0.20, 0.28) | 0.665 |
| PDW (%) | 12.70 (11.35, 13.80) | 12.70 (11.35, 14.15) | 0.678 |
|
| |||
| | |||
| Mild | 99 (76.7) | 44 (50.0) | <0.001 |
| Moderate | 9 (7.0) | 15 (17.0) | |
| Severe | 18 (14.0) | 21 (23.9) | |
| Occlusion | 3 (2.3) | 8 (9.1) | |
| | |||
| 0 | 31 (23.0) | 15 (16.1) | 0.136 |
| 1 | 74 (54.8) | 52 (55.9) | |
| 2 | 22 (16.3) | 17 (18.3) | |
| 3 | 8 (5.9) | 9 (9.7) | |
| | |||
| No | 59 (44.0) | 22 (23.7) | 0.002 |
| Yes | 75 (56.0) | 71 (76.3) | |
The multivariable analyses of clinical characteristics of TSI patients.
| Variables |
|
| OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| Smoking history | 1.220 | <0.001 | 3.388 | 1.265 | 5.115 |
| LDL | 0.404 | 0.035 | 1.497 | 1.081 | 2.388 |
| NT-pro-BNP | 0.003 | 0.019 | 1.003 | 1.001 | 1.006 |
| ABCD3 score | 0.422 | <0.001 | 1.525 | 1.233 | 1.853 |
| Constant | -4.058 | <0.001 | 0.017 | - | - |
Performance of prediction models.
| Predicting factors | AUC | 95% CI | Cut-off value |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| LDL | 0.638 | 0.566 | 0.710 | 1.98 | <0.001 |
| NT-pro-BNP | 0.601 | 0.527 | 0.676 | 48.515 | 0.009 |
| ABCD2 score | 0.681 | 0.613 | 0.750 | 2.5 | <0.001 |
| ABCD3 score | 0.682 | 0.614 | 0.750 | 3.5 | <0.001 |
| Prediction model | 0.762 | 0.701 | 0.823 | 0.325 | <0.001 |
Figure 1The AUC for the prediction of TSI risk of different models.
Figure 2Nomogram for patients with symptoms of TIA. To use the nomogram, the value attributed to a patient is located on each variable axis, and a line is drawn upwards to determine the number of points received for each variable value. The sum of these numbers is located on the total point axis, and a line is then drawn downwards to the probability axis to predict the TSI risk likelihood.
Figure 3Calibration curve of the combined nomogram. The diagonal red line indicates the ideal prediction by a perfect model.