Little is known about intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with pre-existing disability. Disabled patients are often excluded from IVT treatment. Previous studies investigated the role of pre-existing disability on outcomes in AIS patients after IVT. However, no studies have been conducted to date to determine whether IVT may improve clinical outcomes in AIS patients with pre-existing disability. The aim of our study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of IVT in patients with pre-existing moderate and moderately severe disability (pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale score = 3 or 4) affected by AIS. This study was based on a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients admitted to the Udine University Hospital with AIS from January 2015 to May 2018. The efficacy endpoints were the rate of favorable outcome and rate of major neurological improvement. The safety endpoints were the rate of mortality at three months, presence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and presence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). The study population included 110 AIS patients with pre-existing moderate and moderately severe disability, 36 of which received (IVT+) and 74 did not receive IVT (IVT−). AIS disabled patients treated with IVT had higher rates of favorable outcome (66.7% vs. 36.5%, p = 0.003) and major neurological improvement (39.4% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.01) compared to non-treated ones. Two in three disabled patients returned to their pre-stroke functional status when treated with IVT. Prevalence of three-month mortality, ICH, and sICH did not differ in the two groups. Disabled patients affected by AIS significantly improved after IVT. Moderate and moderately severe disability alone should not be considered, per se, as a contraindication to IVT treatment.
Although seizures are frequently seen after cerebrovascular accidents, their effects on long-term outcome in stroke patients are still unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between post-stroke seizures and the risk of long-term disability and mortality in stroke patients. This study is part of a larger population-based study. All patients were prospectively followed up by a face-to-face interview or a structured telephone interview. We enrolled 635 patients with first-ever stroke and without a history of seizures. Prevalence of ischemic stroke (IS) was 85.2%, while the remaining 14.8% of patients were affected by intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). During the study period, 51 subjects (8%) developed post-stroke seizures. Patients with post-stroke seizures were younger, had a higher prevalence of ICH, had a more severe stroke at admission, were more likely to have an IS involving the total anterior circulation, and were more likely to have a lobar ICH than patients without seizures. Moreover, subjects with seizures had more frequently hemorrhagic transformation after IS and cortical strokes. At 24 months, the risk of disability in patients with seizures was almost twice than in those without seizures. However, the negative effect of seizures disappeared in multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier survival curves at 12 years were not significantly different between patients with and without post-stroke seizures. Using the Cox multivariate analysis, age, NIHSS at admission, and pre-stroke mRS were independently associated with all-cause long-term mortality. In our sample, seizures did not impair long-term outcome in patients affected by cerebrovascular accidents. The not significant, slight difference in favor of a better survival for patients with seizures may be attributed to the slight age difference between the two groups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.