| 1. |
- Feigin, Valery L., et al.
(författare)
-
Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990-2019 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - : Elsevier. - 1474-4422 .- 1474-4465. ; 20:10, s. 795-820
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Regularly updated data on stroke and its pathological types, including data on their incidence, prevalence, mortality, disability, risk factors, and epidemiological trends, are important for evidence-based stroke care planning and resource allocation. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) aims to provide a standardised and comprehensive measurement of these metrics at global, regional, and national levels. Methods We applied GBD 2019 analytical tools to calculate stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and the population attributable fraction (PAF) of DALYs (with corresponding 95% uncertainty intervals [UIs]) associated with 19 risk factors, for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. These estimates were provided for ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, and all strokes combined, and stratified by sex, age group, and World Bank country income level. Findings In 2019, there were 12.2 million (95% UI 11.0-13.6) incident cases of stroke, 101 million (93.2-111) prevalent cases of stroke, 143 million (133-153) DALYs due to stroke, and 6.55 million (6.00-7.02) deaths from stroke. Globally, stroke remained the second-leading cause of death (11.6% [10.8-12.2] of total deaths) and the third-leading cause of death and disability combined (5.7% [5.1-6.2] of total DALYs) in 2019. From 1990 to 2019, the absolute number of incident strokes increased by 70.0% (67.0-73.0), prevalent strokes increased by 85.0% (83.0-88.0), deaths from stroke increased by 43.0% (31.0-55.0), and DALYs due to stroke increased by 32.0% (22.0-42.0). During the same period, age-standardised rates of stroke incidence decreased by 17.0% (15.0-18.0), mortality decreased by 36.0% (31.0-42.0), prevalence decreased by 6.0% (5.0-7.0), and DALYs decreased by 36.0% (31.0-42.0). However, among people younger than 70 years, prevalence rates increased by 22.0% (21.0-24.0) and incidence rates increased by 15.0% (12.0-18.0). In 2019, the age-standardised stroke-related mortality rate was 3.6 (3.5-3.8) times higher in the World Bank low-income group than in the World Bank high-income group, and the age-standardised stroke-related DALY rate was 3.7 (3.5-3.9) times higher in the low-income group than the high-income group. Ischaemic stroke constituted 62.4% of all incident strokes in 2019 (7.63 million [6.57-8.96]), while intracerebral haemorrhage constituted 27.9% (3.41 million [2.97-3.91]) and subarachnoid haemorrhage constituted 9.7% (1.18 million [1.01-1.39]). In 2019, the five leading risk factors for stroke were high systolic blood pressure (contributing to 79.6 million [67.7-90.8] DALYs or 55.5% [48.2-62.0] of total stroke DALYs), high body-mass index (34.9 million [22.3-48.6] DALYs or 24.3% [15.7-33.2]), high fasting plasma glucose (28.9 million [19.8-41.5] DALYs or 20.2% [13.8-29.1]), ambient particulate matter pollution (28.7 million [23.4-33.4] DALYs or 20.1% [16.6-23.0]), and smoking (25.3 million [22.6-28.2] DALYs or 17.6% [16.4-19.0]). Interpretation The annual number of strokes and deaths due to stroke increased substantially from 1990 to 2019, despite substantial reductions in age-standardised rates, particularly among people older than 70 years. The highest age-standardised stroke-related mortality and DALY rates were in the World Bank low-income group. The fastest-growing risk factor for stroke between 1990 and 2019 was high body-mass index. Without urgent implementation of effective primary prevention strategies, the stroke burden will probably continue to grow across the world, particularly in low-income countries.
|
|
| 2. |
- Staartjes, Victor E, et al.
(författare)
-
Development and external validation of a clinical prediction model for functional impairment after intracranial tumor surgery.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of neurosurgery. - 1933-0693. ; 134, s. 1743-1750
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Decision-making for intracranial tumor surgery requires balancing the oncological benefit against the risk for resection-related impairment. Risk estimates are commonly based on subjective experience and generalized numbers from the literature, but even experienced surgeons overestimate functional outcome after surgery. Today, there is no reliable and objective way to preoperatively predict an individual patient's risk of experiencing any functional impairment.The authors developed a prediction model for functional impairment at 3 to 6 months after microsurgical resection, defined as a decrease in Karnofsky Performance Status of ≥ 10 points. Two prospective registries in Switzerland and Italy were used for development. External validation was performed in 7 cohorts from Sweden, Norway, Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands. Age, sex, prior surgery, tumor histology and maximum diameter, expected major brain vessel or cranial nerve manipulation, resection in eloquent areas and the posterior fossa, and surgical approach were recorded. Discrimination and calibration metrics were evaluated.In the development (2437 patients, 48.2% male; mean age ± SD: 55 ± 15 years) and external validation (2427 patients, 42.4% male; mean age ± SD: 58 ± 13 years) cohorts, functional impairment rates were 21.5% and 28.5%, respectively. In the development cohort, area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74) were observed. In the pooled external validation cohort, the AUC was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74), confirming generalizability. Calibration plots indicated fair calibration in both cohorts. The tool has been incorporated into a web-based application available at https://neurosurgery.shinyapps.io/impairment/.Functional impairment after intracranial tumor surgery remains extraordinarily difficult to predict, although machine learning can help quantify risk. This externally validated prediction tool can serve as the basis for case-by-case discussions and risk-to-benefit estimation of surgical treatment in the individual patient.
|
|
