الفهرس | Only 14 pages are availabe for public view |
Abstract 65 SUMMARY n Egypt, the overall prevalence rate of stroke is high and it is a major cause for both morbidity and mortality as well as its financial burden. LVD and SVD share similar risk factor profiles. Thus, comparing the risk factor profile of these two subtypes of stroke may contribute to elucidate their pathology and help in determining effective preventive strategies. This study aimed to highlight the prevalence of different risk factors among small vessel and large vessel subtypes of ischemic stroke and their impact on stroke severity on admission and on the outcome of stroke at discharge and at 3, 6 or 12 months follow up, among adult Egyptian as better understanding of risk factors for stroke will provide insights into pathological mechanisms, improve our ability to predict vascular risk and aid the development of new preventive treatments. This is an observational retrospective - cross sectional study, that enrolled 238 patients who were admitted at ASUH and ASUSH stroke centers who have completed six months or one year since the onset of acute ischemic stroke and suffered from either LVD or SVD. Data were collected through phone call questionnaire as patients were contacted and asked about occurrence of PSE. Other relevant data were obtained from SITS of ASU and ASUSH stroke centers. This study found that the prevalence of LVD is (37. 5%) and of SVD was our study is (25. 8%) and that they are both more ISummary 66 prevalent in men than women (56. 7% VS 73. 2% were males in and 43. 3% VS 26. 8% were females respectively). Yet, this difference was not statistically significant(p=0. 1). The current study showed non-significant correlation between HTN, DM, dyslipidemia, previous ischemic stroke and ISHD with neither LVD nor SVD. Moreover, regarding severity and long-term outcome of LVD VS SVD: It is not a surprise that our study found that NIHSS and mRS were significantly less at all time points in SVD group denoting less stroke severity as well as more favorable outcome. In our study, the percentage of patients with unfavorable outcome was more among males in LVD and among females in SVD. Moreover, in both groups the percentage of patients with unfavorable outcome was more among those positive for each of the risk factors except for smoking among SVD patients, yet it wasn’t statistically significant. Finally, this study found that among LVD and SVD patients who received rtPA, both had favorable outcome on discharge compared to patients who didn’t. Yet, SVD patients who received rtPA had a significantly better outcome on discharge (p:0. 02). Long term follow up did not show any significant difference between those who received rTPA and those who did not among both groups |