Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Tuesday, December 3, 2019

Predicted brain age after stroke

There is not one survivor in the world that cares about predictions. They want EXACT STROKE PROTOCOLS LEADING TO 100% RECOVERY. Are you that fucking stupid? This earlier research said 5 years, what changed? 

Oops, I'm not playing by the polite rules of Dale Carnegie,  'How to Win Friends and Influence People'. 


Politeness will never solve anything in stroke.


Predicted brain age after stroke

Natalia Egorova1, 2*, Franziskus Liem3, Vladimir Hachinski4 and Amy Brodtmann2
  • 1The University of Melbourne, Australia
  • 2Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Australia
  • 3Dynamics of Healthy Aging, University of Zurich, Switzerland
  • 4University of Western Ontario, Canada
Aging is a known non-modifiable risk factor for stroke. Usually this refers to chronological rather than biological age. Biological brain age can be estimated based on cortical and subcortical brain measures. For stroke patients, it could serve as a more sensitive marker of brain health than chronological age. In this study, we investigated whether there is a difference in brain age between stroke survivors and control participants matched on chronological age. We estimated brain age at 3 months after stroke, and then followed the longitudinal trajectory over three time-points: within 6 weeks (baseline), at 3 and at 12 months following their clinical event. We found that brain age in stroke participants was higher compared to controls, with the mean difference between the groups varying between 3.9 to 8.7 years depending on the brain measure used for prediction. This difference in brain age was observed at 6 weeks after stroke and maintained at 3 and 12 months after stroke. The presence of group differences already at baseline suggests that stroke might be an ultimate manifestation of gradual cerebrovascular burden accumulation and brain degeneration. Brain age prediction therefore has the potential to be a useful biomarker for quantifying stroke risk.


Keywords: Age prediction, structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), Stroke, chronological age, Brain age
Received: 28 Oct 2019; Accepted: 28 Nov 2019.
Copyright: © 2019 Egorova, Liem, Hachinski and Brodtmann. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Dr. Natalia Egorova, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, natalia.egorova@unimelb.edu.au


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)