Temporal trends and outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke patients with a current or historical diagnosis of cancer

被引:0
|
作者
Peng, Chi [1 ]
Yang, Fan [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Peng, Liwei [5 ]
Zhang, Chenxu [1 ]
Lin, Zhen [1 ]
Chen, Chenxin [1 ]
Gao, Huachen [6 ]
He, Jia [1 ,7 ]
Jin, Zhichao [1 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Naval Med Univ, Dept Hlth Stat, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Army Med Univ, Third Mil Med Univ, Southwest Hosp, Inst Pathol, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[3] Army Med Univ, Third Mil Med Univ, Southwest Hosp, Southwest Canc Ctr, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[4] Minist Educ China, Key Lab Tumor Immunopathol, Chongqing, Peoples R China
[5] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Tangdu Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Xian, Peoples R China
[6] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Tangdu Hosp, Dept Plast Surg & Burns, Xian, Peoples R China
[7] Naval Med Univ, Dept Hlth Stat, 800 Xiangyin Rd, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China
关键词
acute ischaemic stroke; AIS; clinical outcomes; current cancer; historical cancer; HEALTH-CARE PROFESSIONALS; INTRAVENOUS THROMBOLYSIS; RISK; THROMBECTOMY; ALTEPLASE; SAFETY; ONSET; CODES;
D O I
10.1111/ene.15699
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and purpose: The aim was to evaluate the temporal trends, characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) between those with and without current or historical malignancies.Methods: Adult hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of AIS were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database 2007-2017. Logistic regression was used to compare the differences in the utilization of AIS interventions and in-hospital outcomes. For further analysis, subgroup analyses were performed stratified by cancer subtypes.Results: There were 892,862 hospitalizations due to AIS, of which 108,357 (12.14%) had a concurrent diagnosis of current cancer (3.41%) or historical cancer (8.72%). After adjustment for confounders, patients with current malignancy were more likely to have worse clinical outcomes. The presence of historical cancers was not associated with an increase in poor clinical outcomes. Additionally, AIS patients with current malignancy were less likely to receive intravenous thrombolysis (adjusted odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.71). Amongst the subgroups of AIS patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy, outcomes varied by cancer types. Notably, despite these acute stroke interventions, outcome remains poor in AIS patients with lung cancer.Conclusions: Although AIS patients with malignancy generally have worse in-hospital outcomes versus those without, there were considerable variations in these outcomes according to different cancer types and the use of AIS interventions. Finally, treatment of these AIS patients with a current or historical cancer diagnosis should be individualized.
引用
收藏
页码:951 / 962
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Cancer of Brain and Nervous System
    Hazra, Arpita
    Patel, Achint
    Shah, Harshil
    Elnazeir, Marwa
    Mishra, Tushar
    Dave, Mihir
    Thadur, Srilatha
    Shah, Varun
    Barger, Geoffrey
    Zahid, Abdul Samad
    ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, 2016, 80 : S71 - S71
  • [2] Temporal Trends in the Outcomes of Dialysis Patients Admitted With Acute Ischemic Stroke
    Alqahtani, Fahad
    Berzingi, Chalak O.
    Aljohani, Sami
    Al Hajji, Mohamed
    Diab, Anas
    Alvi, Muhammad
    Boobes, Khaled
    Alkhouli, Mohamad
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2018, 7 (12):
  • [3] Temporal trends and outcomes of acute ischaemic strokes in patients hospitalised for percutaneous coronary intervention
    Bay, Benjamin
    Gossling, Alina
    Remmel, Marko
    Becher, Peter M.
    Schrage, Benedikt
    Rimmele, David L.
    Thomalla, Goetz
    Blankenberg, Stefan
    Clemmensen, Peter
    Brunner, Fabian J.
    Waldeyer, Christoph
    EUROINTERVENTION, 2024, 20 (17)
  • [4] Temporal trends and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in patients with cancer
    Pothineni, Naga Venkata
    Shah, Nishi N.
    Rochlani, Yogita
    Saad, Marwan
    Kovelamudi, Swathi
    Marmagkiolis, Konstantinos
    Bhatti, Sabha
    Cilingiroglu, Mehmet
    Aronow, Wilbert S.
    Hakeem, Abdul
    ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE, 2017, 5 (24)
  • [5] Acute myocardial infarction treatments and outcomes in 6.5 million patients with a current or historical diagnosis of cancer in the USA
    Bharadwaj, Aditya
    Potts, Jessica
    Mohamed, Mohamed O.
    Parwani, Purvi
    Swamy, Pooja
    Lopez-Mattei, Juan C.
    Rashid, Muhammad
    Kwok, Chun Shing
    Fischman, David L.
    Vassiliou, Vassilios S.
    Freeman, Philip
    Michos, Erin D.
    Mamas, Mamas A.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2020, 41 (23) : 2183 - +
  • [6] Current practice and future directions in the diagnosis and acute treatment of ischaemic stroke
    Zerna, Charlotte
    Thomalla, Gotz
    Campbell, Bruce C. V.
    Rha, Joung-Ho
    Hill, Michael D.
    LANCET, 2018, 392 (10154): : 1247 - 1256
  • [7] Temporal Trends in the Use of Acute Recanalization Therapies for Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Cancer
    Chatterjee, Abhinaba
    Merkler, Alexander E.
    Murthy, Santosh B.
    Burch, Jaclyn E.
    Chen, Monica L.
    Gialdini, Gino
    Kamel, Hooman
    Ballman, Karla, V
    Navi, Babak B.
    JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES, 2019, 28 (08): : 2255 - 2261
  • [8] Acute ischaemic stroke in active cancer versus non-cancer patients: stroke characteristics, mechanisms and clinical outcomes
    Costamagna, Gianluca
    Hottinger, Andreas F.
    Milionis, Haralampos
    Salerno, Alexander
    Strambo, Davide
    Livio, Francoise
    Navi, Babak B.
    Michel, Patrik
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2024, 31 (04)
  • [9] Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection
    Patel, Urvish
    Simpson, David M.
    Dhamoon, Madip S.
    STROKE, 2016, 47
  • [10] Diagnosis and management of acute ischaemic stroke
    Hurford, Robert
    Sekhar, Alakendu
    Hughes, Tom A. T.
    Muir, Keith W.
    PRACTICAL NEUROLOGY, 2020, 20 (04) : 306 - 318