| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Leoo, T, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk factors and treatment at recurrent stroke onset: Results from the recurrent stroke quality and epidemiology (RESQUE) study
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Cerebrovascular Diseases. - : S. Karger AG. - 1015-9770 .- 1421-9786. ; 25:3, s. 254-260
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- <i>Background:</i> Much effort has been made to study first-ever stroke patients. However, recurrent stroke has not been investigated as extensively. It is unclear which risk factors dominate, and whether adequate secondary prevention has been provided to patients who suffer from recurrent stroke. Also, the different types of recurrent stroke need further evaluation. <i>Methods:</i> The study included patients with recurrent stroke admitted to twenty-three Swedish stroke centers. The type of previous and recurrent stroke was determined, as well as evaluation (when applicable) of recurrent ischemic stroke according to the TOAST classification. Presence of vascular risk factors was registered and compared to the type of stroke. Also assessed was ongoing secondary prevention treatment at recurrent stroke onset. <i>Results:</i> A total of 889 patients with recurrent stroke (mean age 77) were included in the study. Of these, 805 (91%) had ischemic stroke, 78 (9%) had intracerebral hemorrhage and 6 (<1%) stroke of unknown origin. The most frequent vascular risk factors were hypertension (75%) and hyperlipidemia (56%). Among the 889 patients, 29% had atrial fibrillation. Of the patients in the ischemic group with cardiac embolism, only 21% were on anticoagulation treatment. The majority of the patients (75%) had their most recent previous stroke >12 months before admission. <i>Conclusions:</i> Few patients had a recurrent stroke shortly after the previous stroke in this study. This indicates that it is meaningful to prevent a second event with an adequate long-term treatment strategy for secondary prevention after first-ever stroke. There also seems to be a clear potential for improving secondary prevention after stroke.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Skrtic, Stanko, 1970, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk factor identification and assessment in hypertension and diabetes (RIAHD) study.
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Blood pressure. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0803-7051 .- 1651-1999. ; 15:6, s. 367-74
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The RIAHD (Risk factor Identification and Assessment in Hypertension and Diabetes) study was conducted as a non-interventional study in 699 patients with hypertension without additional risk factors (low-risk) or with additional risk factors (high-risk), primarily diabetes and/or micro/macroalbuminuria (MA/A). The RIAHD study aimed to assess novel cardiovascular risk factors (RFs) such as blood viscosity, inflammatory markers and selected genetic polymorphisms. In addition, the RIAHD study also aimed to examine home versus office blood pressures (BPs), objective cardiovascular risk according to ESH/ESC Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation systems (SCORE) and subjectively expressed risk (clinical judgment) by physicians and patients. The health economic impact of other RFs, associated clinical conditions and target organ damage was also studied by evaluating healthcare utilization and sick leave in high-risk patients. In terms of circulating RFs, measured and calculated whole blood viscosity did not differ between the high and low-risk patient groups. Fibrinogen was significantly increased in the high-risk group, while hsCRP did not differ between the two groups. Self-measured BPs at home differed from BPs measured in the office. The average systolic home BPs was 11.8 mmHg lower in the low-risk group and 6.7 mmHg lower in the high-risk group. The diastolic home BPs averages differed 7.1 mm Hg and 4.1 mmHg from office BPs in the low-risk and high-risk groups, respectively. A higher home BP compared with the office BP, i.e. masked high BP values, was found in 21% of patients in the low-risk group and 32% of patients in the high-risk group. Global CV risk assessment (high-risk or low-risk) by the physicians corresponded well to objective risk evaluation (ESH/ESC) in the high-risk hypertensive patients, while physicians tended to underestimate the patients CV risk in the low-risk group (without diabetes and/or MA/A). Proper global risk assessment by judgement is often difficult in cardiovascular patients. The RIAHD study emphasizes the importance of performing a more extended RF assessment in hypertensive patients with as well as without diabetes and/or micro/macroalbuminuria in order to expose the full RF profile.
|
|
