Guoyi Tang1, Zhixin Cao2, Yuting Luo2, Shaoqing Wu3, Xunsha Sun4. 1. Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China. 2. Department of Neurology, National Key Clinical Department and Key Discipline of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China. 3. Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China. wsqone@163.com. 4. Department of Neurology, National Key Clinical Department and Key Discipline of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China. sunxsh3@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It remains inconclusive whether asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (aICH) after acute ischemic stroke is innocuous. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis assessing the relationship between the aICH and poor neurological outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from their inception to 30 November 2021 and performed a meta-analysis on the association between the aICH and neurological prognosis after acute ischemic stroke at 3 months, including poor outcomes (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score ≥ 2 or mRS ≥ 3) and mortality. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the analysis, reporting on a total of 10,915 participants after acute ischemic stroke. The risks of poor outcome (mRS ≥ 2 or mRS ≥ 3) in patients with aICH were significantly higher than patients without ICH (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.33-2.18; OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.20-1.70, respectively), based on adjusted data. The difference between the two groups was not significant for mortality. The results of subgroup analysis showed aICH were associated with higher ratio of mild poor prognosis (mRS ≥ 2) (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.27), but it had no association with functional dependence (mRS ≥ 3) after recanalization. No significant influence of aICH on poor outcome (mRS ≥ 3) was found in non-recanalization group. Further stratified analysis revealed that only aICH with patients receiving endovascular therapy (EVT) could increase the risk of mild poor prognosis (mRS ≥ 2) at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that compared with patients without ICH, those who developed aICH during the acute stage of ischemic stroke had an increasing risk of worse outcome, especially in patients with endovascular therapy.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It remains inconclusive whether asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (aICH) after acute ischemic stroke is innocuous. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis assessing the relationship between the aICH and poor neurological outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from their inception to 30 November 2021 and performed a meta-analysis on the association between the aICH and neurological prognosis after acute ischemic stroke at 3 months, including poor outcomes (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score ≥ 2 or mRS ≥ 3) and mortality. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the analysis, reporting on a total of 10,915 participants after acute ischemic stroke. The risks of poor outcome (mRS ≥ 2 or mRS ≥ 3) in patients with aICH were significantly higher than patients without ICH (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.33-2.18; OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.20-1.70, respectively), based on adjusted data. The difference between the two groups was not significant for mortality. The results of subgroup analysis showed aICH were associated with higher ratio of mild poor prognosis (mRS ≥ 2) (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.27), but it had no association with functional dependence (mRS ≥ 3) after recanalization. No significant influence of aICH on poor outcome (mRS ≥ 3) was found in non-recanalization group. Further stratified analysis revealed that only aICH with patients receiving endovascular therapy (EVT) could increase the risk of mild poor prognosis (mRS ≥ 2) at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that compared with patients without ICH, those who developed aICH during the acute stage of ischemic stroke had an increasing risk of worse outcome, especially in patients with endovascular therapy.
Authors: J H Park; Y Ko; W-J Kim; M S Jang; M H Yang; M-K Han; C-W Oh; S H Park; Jisung Lee; Juneyoung Lee; H-J Bae; P B Gorelick Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-01-25 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Timothy J England; Philip M W Bath; Gillian M Sare; Chamila Geeganage; Thierry Moulin; Desmond O'Neill; France Woimant; Hanne Christensen; Peter De Deyn; Didier Leys; E Bernd Ringelstein Journal: Stroke Date: 2010-10-28 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Carlos A Molina; José Alvarez-Sabín; Joan Montaner; Sonia Abilleira; Juan F Arenillas; Pilar Coscojuela; Francisco Romero; Agusti Codina Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Richard Libman; Thomas Kwiakowski; Patrick Lyden; James C Grotta; Barbara C Tilley; Susan C Fagen; Steven R Levine; Joseph P Broderick; Yan Lin; Christopher Lewandowski; Micheal R Frankel Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2005 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Imanuel Dzialowski; J H Warwick Pexman; Philip A Barber; Andrew M Demchuk; Alastair M Buchan; Michael D Hill Journal: Stroke Date: 2006-11-22 Impact factor: 7.914