Back

Risk Factors for Intracranial Hemorrhage Transformation and Poor Prognosis after EVT for Acute Vessel Occlusion Stroke

Ma, L.; Wang, D. f.; Li, Z. q.; Ye, G. f.; Chen, P. d.; Chen, M. s.

2023-06-04 neurology
10.1101/2023.05.25.23290563 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to explore the risk factors for hemorrhagic transformation after endovascular treatment for acute large-vessel occlusion stroke and the risk factors for poor prognosis after endovascular treatment. MethodsA total of 132 cases of patients with acute large vessel occlusion stroke who underwent endovascular treatment in the Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022 were included. According to whether there was intracranial hemorrhage within 72 hours after surgery, the patients were divided into hemorrhage transformation(HT) group and non-hemorrhage(no HT) group. The two groups were compared in terms of gender, age, history of hypertension, history of atrial fibrillation, and other factors to determine whether there were statistical differences. ResultsAmong the 132 included patients, 30 cases had hemorrhage transformation and 102 cases were in the non-hemorrhage group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the ASPECTS score on admission and the NLR within 24 hours after surgery were independent risk factors for hemorrhage transformation. The rate of good prognosis (MRS score 0-2) at discharge was 31.2%, and multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that advanced age, history of hypertension, and NIHSS score were independent risk factors for poor prognosis. ConclusionThe NLR within 24 hours after endovascular treatment is an independent risk factor for hemorrhage transformation in acute large vessel occlusion stroke and can be used as one of the predictive indicators. Advanced age, history of hypertension, and NIHSS score are independent risk factors for poor prognosis after endovascular treatment for acute large vessel occlusion stroke.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.