Abstract 325: Impact of Statin Initiation and Resumption Following Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction/Purpose The safety and efficacy of statin therapy following intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) remain controversial, given inconsistent findings and variable clinical practices. This systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to clarify the impact of statin initiation versus resumption after ICH on recurrent hemorrhage, mortality, and functional recovery, hypothesizing that initiation offers equal safety with potentially greater benefit than resumption. Materials/Methods Following PROSPERO registration, a structured search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Eligible studies examined statin resumption or initiation and associated outcomes post‐ICH. Seven reviewer teams screened 19,716 titles/abstracts and 63 full texts. Risk of bias was assessed using ROB2 for clinical trials and Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Data pertaining to mortality, functional status, recurrent ICH, and stroke were extracted and meta‐analyzed. (Figure 1, Figure 2) Results From 23 studies, statin initiation following ICH yielded significant reductions in short‐term mortality (≤90 days) (OR: 0.15, CI: 0.11–0.20), and long‐term mortality (>90 days to 1 year) (OR: 0.45, CI: 0.33–0.61). Statin resumption demonstrated short‐term benefit (OR: 0.32, CI: 0.18–0.55) and long‐term benefit (OR: 0.65, CI: 0.46–0.92), though effects were less pronounced than with initiation. Functional independence at 90 days and recurrent ICH risk also favored statin therapy compared to control. GRADE assessments identified limitations due to study design heterogeneity and predominance of non‐randomized data. Conclusion Statin initiation and resumption after ICH may improve mortality and reduce recurrent hemorrhage, with statin initiation yielding greater effect size. While these data support cautious statin use in this patient population, further randomized trials are needed for confirmation and to define patient selection criteria. Graphics/Tables: Figure 1. Meta‐analysis summary: Statin resumption versus control for all‐cause mortality and functional independence. Figure 2. Meta‐analysis summary: Statin initiation versus control for all‐cause mortality, recurrent ICH, and functional outcomes. image image
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".