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.

Saturday, December 21, 2019

Stroke Etiology Modifies the Effect of Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke

Wrong endpoint, stroke survivors care not one fucking bit about reperfusion. ARE YOU THAT FUCKING STUPID? 100% RECOVERY IS THE ONLY GOAL IN STROKE!    

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.

 

Stroke Etiology Modifies the Effect of Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and GSR Investigators
Originally publishedhttps://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.028383Stroke. ;0:STROKEAHA.119.028383

Background and Purpose—

Stroke etiology drives thrombus composition. We thus hypothesized that endovascular treatment shows different efficacy in cardioembolic versus noncardioembolic large-vessel occlusions (LVOs).

Methods—

Procedural characteristics, grade of reperfusion, and functional outcome at discharge and 90 days were compared between patients with cardioembolic versus noncardioembolic LVO from the GSR-ET (German Stroke Registry–Endovascular Treatment; n=2589). To determine associations with functional outcome, adjusted odds ratios and 95% CIs were calculated using ordinal multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for potential baseline confounder variables.

Results—

Endovascular treatment of cardioembolic LVO had a higher rate of successful reperfusion (85.6% versus 81.0%; P=0.002) and a higher rate of complete reperfusion after a single thrombectomy pass (45.7% versus 38.1%; P<0.001) compared with noncardioembolic LVO. Cardioembolic LVO was associated with better functional outcome at discharge (adjusted odds ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.37–1.88]) and 90 days (adjusted odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.09–1.53]). In mediation analysis, reperfusion explained 47% of the effect of etiology on functional outcome at discharge.

Conclusions—

These results provide evidence for higher efficacy of endovascular treatment in cardioembolic LVO compared with noncardioembolic LVO.

No comments:

Post a Comment