Long-Term Survival After Stroke According to Reperfusion Therapy, Cardiovascular Therapy and Gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A wide variety of factors influence stroke prognosis, including age, stroke severity and comorbid conditions; but most current information about outcomes and safety is derived from patients at 3 - 12 months and mostly coming from the hospital activity. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether treatment strategies have a differential impact on long-survival after acute ischemic stroke among men versus women. METHODS: Acute ischemic stroke patients identified from the population-based register between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 were included, and they were classified into: 1) Acute ischemic stroke + intravenous thrombolysis (group I); 2) Acute ischemic stroke + mechanical thrombectomy with or without intravenous thrombolysis (group II); 3) Acute ischemic stroke + medical therapy alone (no reperfusion therapies) (group III). Follow-up went through up until December 2016. The probability of survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the hazard ratio was obtained by using the Cox proportional hazard regression models. Mortality was interpreted as overall mortality. RESULTS: A total of 14,368 cases (men 50.1%), 77.1 ± 11.0 years old were included. There was higher survival among those treated with intravenous thrombolysis (P < 0.001); women treated with thrombectomy (P < 0.001); and women < 80 years old without reperfusion therapy. The most common medications were antiplatelets (52.8%), associated with lower survival (P < 0.001); and statins (46.5%), associated with higher survival. The regression model produced the following independent outcome variables associated to mortality: anticoagulant hazard ratio (HR) 1.53 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.44 - 1.63, P < 0.001), diuretics HR 1.71 (95% CI: 1.63 - 1.79, P < 0.001), antiplatelet HR 1.49 (95% CI: 1.42 - 1.56, P < 0.001), statins HR 0.73 (95% CI: 0.70 - 0.77; P < 0.001), angiotensin II receptor antagonists HR 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89 - 0.98, P = 0.008) and reperfusion therapy HR 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 - 0.97, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Men and women have different prognoses after revascularization treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Under 80 years old the women appear to have a better outcome than men when treated with thrombolysis therapy and/or catheter-based thrombectomy. The chronic cardiovascular pharmacotherapy must be evaluated whether they should be included as factors in the decision to reperfusion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".