Objective Immune dysregulation influences outcome following acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Admission white blood cell (WBC) counts are routinely obtained, making the neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR) a readily available biomarker of the immune response to stroke. This study sought to identify the relationship between NLR and 90 day AIS outcome. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent endovascular therapy for AIS at West Virginia University Hospitals, Morgantown, West Virginia. Admission WBC differentials were analyzed as the NLR. Stroke severity was measured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score and outcome by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. Univariate relationships between NLR, age, NIHSS, and mRS were established by correlation coefficients; the t test was used to compare NLR with recanalization and stroke location (anterior vs posterior). Logistic regression models were developed to identify the ability of NLR to predict mRS when controlling for age, recanalization, and treatment with IV tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). Results 116 patients were reviewed from 2008 to 2011. Mean age of the sample was 67 years, and 54% were women. Mean baseline NIHSS score was 17 and 90 day mRS score was 4. There was a significant relationship between NLR and mRS (p=0.02) that remained when controlling for age, treatment with IV tPA, and recanalization. NLR ≥5.9 predicted poor outcome and death at 90 days. Conclusions This study shows that the NLR, a readily available biomarker, may be a clinically useful tool for risk stratification when evaluating AIS patients as candidates for endovascular therapies.

No abstract

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective therapy for Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients experiencing motor fluctuations, medication resistant tremor, and/or dyskinesia. Currently, the subthalamic nucleus and the globus pallidus internus are the two most widely used targets, with individual advantages and disadvantages influencing patient selection. Potential DBS patients are selected using the few existing guidelines and the available DBS literature, and many centers employ an interdisciplinary team review of the individual’s risk-benefit profile. Programmed settings vary based on institution or physician specific protocols designed to maximize benefits and limit adverse effects. Expectations should be realistic and clearly defined during the evaluation process, and each bothersome symptom should be addressed in the context of building the risk-benefit profile. Current DBS research is focused on improved symptom control, the development of newer technologies, and the improved efficiency of stimulation delivery. Techniques deliver stimulation in a more personalized way, and methods of adaptive DBS such as closed loop approaches are already on the horizon.