Thrombolysis Outcomes in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Patients with Pre-Existing Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Thrombolysis treatment for ischaemic stroke in patients with pre-existing disabilities, including cognitive impairment, remains controversial. Previous studies have suggested functional outcomes post-thrombolysis are worse in patients with cognitive impairment. This study aimed to compare and explore factors contributing to thrombolysis outcomes, including haemorrhagic complications, in cognitively and non-cognitively impaired patients with ischaemic stroke. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 428 ischaemic stroke patients who were thrombolysed between January 2016 and February 2021 was performed. Cognitive impairment was defined as a diagnosis of dementia, mild cognitive impairment, or clinical evidence of the condition. The outcome measures included morbidity (using NIHSS and mRS), haemorrhagic complications, and mortality, and were analysed using multivariable logistic regression models. Results: The analysis of the cohort revealed that 62 patients were cognitively impaired. When compared to those without cognitive impairment, this group showed worse functional status at discharge (mRS 4 vs. 3, p < 0.001) and a higher probability of dying within 90 days (OR 3.34, 95% CI 1.85–6.01, p < 0.001). A higher risk of a fatal ICH post-thrombolysis was observed in the cognitively impaired patients, and, after controlling for covariates, cognitive impairment remained a significant predictor of a fatal haemorrhage (OR 4.79, 95% CI 1.24–18.45, p = 0.023). Conclusions: Cognitively impaired ischaemic stroke patients experience increased morbidity, mortality, and haemorrhagic complications following thrombolytic therapy. However cognitive status is not independently predictive of most outcome measures. Further work is required to elucidate contributing factors to the poor outcomes observed in these patients and help guide thrombolysis decision-making in clinical practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".