|
Abstract
Purpose:
The aim of the study was to analyze the effect
of age on management and prognosis of stroke.
Methods:
A prospective study was performed in consecutive
patients admitted to an emergency department (ED)
with a diagnosis of stroke. Comparison according
to age (<75 vs >75 years old) was
done, with a 1-year follow-up including autonomy
and outcome.
Results:
In older patients, brain magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) (6% vs 27%, P < .001) and immediate referral
to the stroke unit were less frequent (6% vs 28%,
P < .001); median length of stay was longer
(11 vs 8 days, P = .007); and in-hospital mortality
tended to be higher (12% vs 6%, not significant).
After discharge, 1-year mortality was higher (27%
vs 14%, P = .004). In a multivariate analysis,
severity of stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and dementia
were independent positive predictors of 1-year
mortality, whereas age was not.
Conclusion:
Despite the fact that age was not an independent
predictor when stroke severity was considered,
our data suggests differences in the management
of elderly, compared with younger stroke patients,
admitted to the ED.
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
INTRODUCTION
Stroke
is caused by disruption of blood circulation in the
brain and represents the leading cause of neurologic
disability in the elderly (1), (2), (3). As the proportion
of the elderly in the population is expected to dramatically
increase, studies regarding the effect of age on different
medical diseases and conditions are necessary to determine
appropriate management. Stroke incidence has declined
in persons aged younger than 75 years (4), but prevalence
is still high in elderly patients; and stroke represents
one of the leading causes of death in this population
(5). However, data regarding diagnostic and management
decisions in older patients who present with signs and
symptoms of stroke are scarce.
Previous reports showed differences in management concerning
computed tomographic (CT) scan use and care access(6)
and treatments including antithrombotic and lipid-lowering
agents(7). In practice, the best criteria of stroke
management include new parameters (time before medical
care, magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], and thrombolysis)
that were not considered at that time. To our knowledge,
no reported study has previously investigated the effect
of age on stroke management in an urban teaching hospital.
In Saudi Arabia, most of strokes in elderly patients
are referred to an emergency department (ED). The aim
of the present study was to analyze the effect of age
on management and prognosis of stroke, and to identify
factors affecting stroke survival in elderly patients
referred initially to an ED. Time to be seen by a physician,
CT scan and MRI use, antithrombotic and thrombolysis
agents use, care and in particular access to a stroke
center were the variables used to assess stroke management.
Length of stay, autonomy, 3-month hospital-free days,
and in-hospital and 1-year mortality were the outcome
measures of interest.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study was designed as a prospective study performed
during a period from January 2009 to July 2009 to analyze
age influence on stroke management and prognosis in
elderly patients admitted to an ED with a diagnosis
of stroke. In 2010, we completed this study to determine
patient outcome, including autonomy and death. In compliance
with hospital law, this observational study needed approval
from the continuous medical education committee (equivalent
to the ethical review Board). We included all consecutive
patients with acute stroke admitted to the ED of a 250-bed
urban hospital. All patients presenting with primary
diagnosis of stroke were included in our cohort. Primary
diagnosis of stroke was defined as rapidly developing
signs of focal or global disturbance of cerebral function
either transient or lasting for more than 24 hours,
or leading to death, with no apparent cause other than
that of vascular origin (8),(9).
For every patient, medical care by the physician in
charge included medical history, especially cardiovascular
risk factors, previous neurologic, cognitive and cardiac
diseases, living conditions (home living, institution),
autonomy (daily help, and daily activity, using the
validated Activities of Daily Living scale [ADL](10)),
physical examination, and brain imaging. Autonomy, as
ascertained by questionnaire, was defined as an ADL
score = 6. Hypertension was considered present if a
patient had known hypertension or treatment of hypertension
at admission. Diabetes was considered present if a patient
had known diabetes or treatment of diabetes on admission.
History of atrial fibrillation was considered present
if present on the electrocardiogram at admission. Diagnosis
of stroke was performed according to the World Health
Organization definition, using clinical and imaging
data from ED and discharge units including neurologic,
geriatric, and other units. Data sources were obtained
from complete ED medical charts of patients admitted
for suspicion of stroke, hospitalization reports, and
medical charts from all health care services. Stroke
severity was assessed at admission using the validated
modified Rankin scale because of its feasibility in
ED (11). All final diagnoses were performed according
to in-hospital management and final conclusions before
out-hospital discharge of patients. Patients were compared
according to their age; those younger than 75 years
classified into the younger group and those 75 years
or older into the older group.
2.1 Management analysis
Criteria were chosen for management analysis, including
time to be seen by a physician in the ED; emergency
stroke center admission; emergency brain imaging including
CT scan and MRI; treatments including antithrombotic,
anticoagulant treatment and fibrinolysis; and admission
after ED to neurologic, geriatric, or intensive care
unit. All decisions were made by the emergency physician
according to standard clinical practice. All events
occurring in the study population were identified by
monitoring of all inpatient health services. After hospitalization
report analysis, missing data were obtained from the
complete patient chart.
2.2 Outcome analysis
We determined the length of stay in the hospital and
in-hospital mortality. To enable us to compare the length
of hospitalization between the 2 groups while taking
into account the deaths, we calculated the number of
hospital-free days during the 3-month period after admission
to the ED, all dead patients being scored 0 hospital-free
days, as previously described (12). In 2010, to analyze
the outcome for each living patient after stroke discharge,
a phone call and a written questionnaire to the patient
him or herself or to the family or caregiver, was used.
This questionnaire, including parameters about autonomy
(home living, need for help, institution, daily living
activities) and evolution (any new admission) during
the year after stroke, was administered. At this stage,
we obtained information on ADL status for demented patients
from the correspondents.
Data are expressed as number of patients (percentage)
and mean ± SD for normally distributed variables,
and median and 95% confidence interval (CI) for non
normally distributed variables (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).
We used single-entry data methods. Comparison of proportions
was performed using the X 2
test or the Fisher exact method; comparison of 2 means
was performed using the Student t test, and comparison
of 2 medians was performed using the Mann-Whitney test.
Survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and
differences in survival between groups was assessed
by the log-rank test. For subgroup analysis, the Bonferroni
correction was applied to the log-rank test.
Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards
models were used to determine variables associated with
stroke death within 1 year after admission. To avoid
over-fitting, we used a conservative approach and included
only the significant variables in the univariate analysis
(P value of entry <.10). The type of stroke was entered
as hemorrhagic vs ischemic, the reference being a transient
stroke. Interactions were not tested. The Spearman coefficient
matrix correlation was used to identify significant
colinearity (>0.70) between variables. A backward-elimination
model was applied. The hazards ratio and the 95% CI
of variables selected by the Cox model were calculated.
Then we compared the adjusted estimates of survival
between young and elderly patients. All P values were
2-tailed, and a P value of less than .05 was considered
significant. Statistical analysis was performed using
NCSS 2004 (Statistical Solutions Ltd, Corve, Ireland).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RESULTS
During the study period,
we identified 253 patients in our ED with a suspected
stroke. After the exclusion of 47 patients (19%) with
a diagnosis other than stroke (n = 29) and without final
diagnosis (n = 18), 206 patients met the inclusion criterion
and were included in our study with a final diagnosis
of stroke.
Baseline characteristics are represented in Table 1.
Hypertension, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease,
dementia, and antithrombotic or anticoagulant treatment
were significantly more frequent in elderly patients,
but tobacco smoking was significantly less observed.
Symptom duration was significantly different between
the younger and older groups, but there was no significant
difference for patients arriving before 3 hours after
the onset of stroke (P = .63). Type of stroke (ischemic
or hemorrhagic) was similar between groups (Table 1).
| |
Younger
group (n = 101)
|
Older
group (n = 105)
|
P
|
| Age
(years) |
59 ± 13
|
83 ± 5
|
-
|
| Men |
36 (36%)
|
49 (47%)
|
.12
|
| Women |
65 (64%)
|
56 (53%)
|
|
| Previous
history |
|
|
|
| Hypertension |
52 (51%)
|
74 (70%)
|
.005
|
| Dyslipidemia |
37 (37%)
|
43 (41%)
|
.57
|
| Diabetes mellitus |
22 (22%)
|
19 (18%)
|
.6
|
| Smoking |
53 (52%)
|
37 (35%)
|
.02
|
| Dementia |
10 (10%)
|
24 (23%)
|
.01
|
| Previous stroke |
20 (20%)
|
27 (26%)
|
.32
|
| Coronary artery
disease |
6 (6%)
|
21 (20%)
|
.003
|
| Atrial fibrillation |
16 (16%)
|
30 (29%)
|
.03
|
| Symptoms
duration |
|
|
|
| <3 hours |
27 (27%)
|
24 (23%)
|
.63
|
| 3-24 hours |
33 (33%)
|
35 (33%)
|
|
| >24 hours |
29 (29%)
|
23 (22%)
|
|
| Unknown |
21 (21%)
|
23 (22%)
|
|
| Previous
treatment |
|
|
|
| None |
70 (69%)
|
48 (46%)
|
<.001
|
| Antithrombotic |
23 (23)
|
42 (41)
|
.01
|
| Anticoagulant |
6 (6)
|
15 (15)
|
.05
|
| Both |
28 (28%)
|
55 (52%)
|
<.001
|
| Unknown |
3 (3%)
|
2 (2%)
|
|
| Type of
stroke |
|
|
|
| Ischemic |
76 (75%)
|
72 (68%)
|
.52
|
| Hemorrhagic |
7 (7%)
|
8 (8%)
|
.54
|
| Transient |
18 (18%)
|
25 (24%)
|
.34
|
| Living conditions |
(n = 100)
|
(n = 105)
|
|
| Home living |
99 (99%)
|
89 (84%)
|
.56
|
| Help for daily
living |
0 (0%)
|
8 (8%)
|
<.001
|
| Institution |
1 (1%)
|
8 (8%)
|
.04
|
| Autonomy |
(n = 65)
|
(n = 56)
|
|
| ADL score |
6.0 ± 0.2
|
5.8 ± 0.7
|
.13
|
| Autonomy-free |
64 (99%)
|
51 (91%)
|
.09
|
Table 1: Baseline
characteristics
3.1 Management of stroke
All older patients were managed within the first hour
after admission, and more than 95% received a CT scan
(Table 2). There was no significant difference for CT
scan use and treatment, but older patients tended to be
managed later (P = .06) and had brain MRI less often (6%
vs 27%, P < .001). In patients without brain MRI, only
1 patient in the young group and 3 patients in the older
group had pacemakers. Stroke was more severe in elderly
patients, as reflected by higher Rankin scores (Table
2). Thrombolytics were used in 3 young patients seen within
3 hours. When considering MRI results, type of stroke
and stroke severity and the decision to use thrombolytics
in patients seen within 3 hours remained unexplained in
4 patients in the younger group and 13 in the older group.
The weight of previous treatment with anticoagulant was
insignificant (1 patient in the younger group and 3 patients
in the older group). Immediate referral and post-ED admissions
were different between groups except for the intensive
care unit. Immediate referral to the stroke unit was less
frequent in older patients (6% vs 28%, P < .001). After
the ED, hospitalizations for older patients were mainly
represented by the geriatric unit (P < .001) compared
to the stroke unit and general wards for younger patients
(<.001)
(Table 2).
| |
Younger
group
(n = 101)
|
Older
group
(n = 105)
|
P
|
| Management |
|
|
|
| Time before
medical care in the ED (min) |
35 (30-50)
|
45 (30-60)
|
.06
|
| Brain imaging |
|
|
|
| CT scan |
84 (83%)
|
100 (95%)
|
.06
|
| MRI |
27 (27%)
|
6 (6%)
|
<.001
|
| Fibrinolysis |
3 (3)
|
0 (0)
|
.12
|
| Immediate
referral |
|
|
|
| Stroke unit |
28 (28)
|
6 (6)
|
<.001
|
| Intensive care
unit |
1 (1)
|
2 (2)
|
1.00
|
| ED admission |
71 (70)
|
98 (93)
|
<.001
|
| Admissions
after ED |
|
|
|
| Stroke unit |
35 (35)
|
13 (12)
|
<.001
|
| General wards |
63 (62)
|
21 (20)
|
<.001
|
| Geriatric unit |
4 (4)
|
33 (31)
|
<.001
|
| Mean length
of stay (median)(d) |
8 (6-9)
|
11 (9-12)
|
.008
|
| Mean hospital-free
days (median) |
82 (81-84)
|
78 (75-81)
|
.002
|
| In-hospital
death |
6 (6)
|
13 (12)
|
.15
|
| Available severity
score |
(n = 85)
|
(n = 94)
|
|
| Rankin score |
2 (2-3)
|
3 (3-4)
|
.009
|
| Rankin score
>3 |
21 (25%)
|
40 (43%)
|
.017
|
| Available post
discharge data |
(n = 95)
|
(n = 92)
|
|
| Treatment out
of the hospital in survivors |
70 (74%)
|
55 (60%)
|
.06
|
| Antithrombotic |
13 (14%)
|
20 (22%)
|
.18
|
| Anticoagulant |
1
|
2
|
.62
|
| Both |
13
|
19
|
.25
|
| None |
12(13%)
|
17(18%)
|
.23
|
| Long-term outcome |
(n = 101)
|
(n = 105)
|
|
| Lost on follow
up |
1 (1)
|
2 (2)
|
1.00
|
|
(n = 100)
|
(n = 103)
|
|
| One-year mortality |
14 (14%)
|
28 (27%)
|
.004
|
| One-year results
in surviving patients |
(n = 86)
|
(n = 72)
|
|
| Home living |
79 (92%)
|
36 (50%)
|
<.001
|
| Help for daily
living |
4 (5%)
|
18 (25%)
|
|
| Institution |
3 (3%)
|
18 (25%)
|
|
| |
(n = 55)
|
(n = 55)
|
|
| ADL |
5.7 ± 0.8
|
5.2 ± 1.6
|
.02
|
| Autonomy free
(ADL = 6) |
48 (87%)
|
38 (73%)
|
.09
|
Table
2: Management of stroke and outcome of patients
Data are expressed in number
of patients (percentage), mean ± SD, or and median
(range).
3.2 Outcome and survival
analysis
Regarding living conditions, information was available
for 100 (99%) younger patients and all older patients
at baseline (Table 1), and for 86 (100%) surviving young
patients and 72 (96%) surviving old patients after 1
year (Table 2). Regarding ADL and autonomy-free results,
information was available for 65 (64%) younger patients
and 56 (53%) older patients at baseline (Table 1) and
for 55 (64%) surviving younger patients and 52 (69%)
surviving older patients (Table 2). At baseline, older
patients were less frequently living at home with a
significant higher value for disabilities on the ADL
score and there were a lower number of autonomy-free
patients. After 1 year, only 51% of older patients were
still living at home, compared to 92% in the younger
group (P < .001), and ADL score and autonomy-free
patients in this group worsened (Table 2).
After admission, length of stay was longer in older
patients (P = .008); in-hospital mortality tended to
be higher in older patients (12% vs. 6%, nonsignificant);
and the 3-month post discharge, hospital-free days period
was shorter in older patients (P = .002).
At the time of analysis, 14 patients in the younger
group and 28 patients in the older group had died. The
1-year mortality rate after diagnosis of stroke was
16% in younger patients (95% CI, 8-25%) compared with
33% in older patients (95% CI, 23%-43%) (P = .014, Fig.1).
Compared with the expected mortality in the general
population in Saudi Arabia, the mortality in our study
cohort was significantly higher in both older (27% vs.
11%, P < .01) and younger (14% vs. 1%, P < .001)
patients or when considering the whole cohort (20% vs.
12%, P < .001).

Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier
estimates of death in patients aged < or >75
years (P = .014). Time zero is the onset of the stroke.
Curves show survival considering all deaths from any
cause.
3.3 Predictors of mortality
Comparison between deceased and living patients is shown
in Table 3. In the multivariate analysis, hemorrhagic
stroke, dementia, and a high Rankin score were independent
positive predictors of 1-year mortality (Table 4).
| |
Living
|
Deceased
|
P
|
Hazard
ratio (95%CI)
|
| |
(n = 164)
|
(n = 39)
|
|
|
| Men |
97 (59)
|
21 (54)
|
.59
|
1
|
| Women |
67 (41)
|
18 (46)
|
|
1.23 (0.64-2.38)
|
| Age |
69 ± 16
|
80 ± 11
|
<.001
|
|
| Age >75 |
75 (46)
|
28 (72)
|
.004
|
2.47 (1.19-5.12)
|
| Hypertension |
102 (62)
|
23 (59)
|
.72
|
0.69 (0.36-1.32)
|
| Dyslipidemia |
70 (43)
|
10 (26)
|
.07
|
0.49 (0.23-1.04)
|
| Diabetes mellitus |
34 (21)
|
7 (18)
|
.83
|
0.91 (0.40-2.07)
|
| Coronary artery
disease |
20 (12)
|
7 (18)
|
.43
|
1.24 (0.52-2.99)
|
| Atrial fibrillation |
29 (18)
|
16 (41)
|
.003
|
2.28 (1.17-4.45)
|
| Previous stroke |
40 (24)
|
6 (15)
|
.29
|
0.70 (0.29-1.69)
|
| Dementia |
19 (12)
|
13 (33)
|
.002
|
3.36 (1.70-6.64)
|
| Tobacco |
80 (49)
|
9 (23)
|
.004
|
0.32 (0.15-0.71)
|
| Ischemic stroke |
118 (72)
|
29 (74)
|
.84
|
1.10 (0.52-2.35)
|
| Hemorrhagic
stroke |
7 (4)
|
7 (18)
|
.007
|
4.38 (1.91-10.01)
|
| Poor autonomy |
11 (7)
|
4 (10)
|
.49
|
1.37 (0.49-3.89)
|
| |
(n = 141)
|
(n = 36)
|
|
|
| Rankin score |
2 (2-3)
|
4 (4-5)
|
<.001
|
|
| Rankin score
>3 |
35 (25)
|
26 (72)
|
<.001
|
6.61 (2.98-14.66)
|
| |
(n = 159)
|
(n = 39)
|
|
|
| Previous antithrombotic
or anticoagulation treatment |
60 (38)
|
21 (54)
|
.07
|
0.69 (0.36-1.33)
|
Table 3: Comparison
between deceased and survivors 1 year after admission
Data are expressed as number
of patients (percentage), mean ± SD, or median
(95% CI). P values are for the comparison of living
patients with deceased patients and were calculated
using the unpaired Student t test, the Mann-Whitney
test, the X 2 test or Fisher
exact method, as appropriate. Hazards ratio with corresponding
95% CI were calculated using univariate Cox regression
analysis and are for the comparison of living patients
with deceased patients.
| |
Prevalence
(n = 179)
|
Hazards
ratio (95%CI)
|
P
|
| Rankin score
>3 |
61 (34)
|
7.17 (3.18-16.15)
|
<.001
|
| Hemorrhagic
stroke |
31 (17)
|
5.67 (2.25-13.69)
|
<.001
|
| Dementia |
12 (7)
|
2.66 (1.30-5.45)
|
.007
|
Table 4: Multivariate
Cox proportional-hazards analysis of variables associated
with death within 1 year after admission for stroke
Because data for Rankin
were missing for some patients, the final sample used
in the multivariate analysis consisted of 179 patients,
36 (20%) of whom died.
DISCUSSION
Very few studies have included elderly patients with
a mean age of 75 years or older (6),(7),(14),(15),(16),(17),(18),(19),(20),(21),
particularly in the ED where most elderly patients with
acute stroke are referred. Our study was performed to
analyze collectively the management of stroke in ED-referred
elderly patients considering mortality, autonomy outcomes,
and factors associated with death at the time of thrombolytics
and MRI.
Our findings indicate that management of stroke in elderly
patients in the ED is different compared with younger
patients, but brings very positive results. Elderly
stroke patients seen in the ED were managed with the
same delay and received the same treatment as younger
patients. Moreover, elderly patients all benefited from
a CT scan at the time of the diagnosis, in the same
proportion as the younger patients. This result represents
important progress compared with previous data that
reported a significant decrease of CT scan and antithrombotic
treatment use with age (6),(7). However, the explanations
for this difference are numerous and could be related
to individual practice in various countries, as well
as evolution in stroke management. Despite this positive
result, some points remain significantly different for
elderly patients. At admission, assessment with MRI
and admission to the stroke unit were less frequently
observed in this group despite a greater severity of
stroke in older patients as shown by Rankin-modified
scores, ICU referral, and initial mortality. The difference
observed for MRI assessment was not explained by MRI
contraindication. At discharge from the ED, referral
to the neurologic department, particularly to the stroke
unit, was significantly lower in elderly patients.
Our results support the fact that despite progress in
stroke management, age is still associated with a difference
in management using modern methods of brain imaging
in patients presenting with stroke in the ED.
However, this age-related difference can be influenced
by other factors. Firstly, we found a difference between
groups for duration of symptoms, but the nonsignificant
difference observed for patients arriving to ED before
3 hours of symptoms duration does not explain a 4-fold
less use of MRI and immediate stroke unit referral in
the older group. Several studies have shown a beneficial
effect of stroke unit or neurologic department management
compared with general units for all subgroups of elderly
patients (19), (22), but these differences have been
inconsistently observed (20). Therefore, this can reflect
an individual physician's management without consideration
of investigation. Lastly, the hemorrhagic risk of thrombolytic
agents in the stroke unit in older patients could contribute
to the difference observed in management through its
influence on stroke unit admission (23). However, thrombolysis
was very rare in our study, and the association between
age, thrombolysis, and stroke hemorrhagic transformation
is not so clear because some studies did not observe
any significant difference between groups according
to age (24),(25),(26).
Overall, the age-related differences in management revealed
by our study can be explained by several factors. Ageism
has been previously reported in the management of cerebrovascular
disease for prevention (27), (28), investigation, and
treatment (29). However, we cannot affirm that observed
differences are related with ageism despite the fact
that these differences do not appear to be justified
by our results or previous studies in elderly stroke
patients.
We found that the modified Rankin score, type of stroke,
and dementia were predictors of a 1-year mortality,
whereas age was not (21), (30), (31), (32), (33). The
results overall highlight the weight of comorbidities
compared to age in elderly patients and the need to
evaluate and to consider stroke severity more than age,
and does not support the notion that age is essentially
a negative determining factor in the management of stroke.
Previous studies have reported an association of mortality
with type of stroke (32),(34),(35),(36), atrial fibrillation
(17),(32),(33),(38), diabetes mellitus, increased blood
glucose or discontinuous diabetes treatment (31),(33),(37),
cognitive impairment (31),(37), living conditions (38),
and autonomy (32). In our study, hemorrhagic stroke
was associated with mortality, which could have been
favored by antithrombotic or anticoagulant treatment
(53% of older patients) or falls, a frequent event in
this population (39),(40),(41). Previous dementia was
independently associated with mortality in stroke patients
in our study, as with risk of stroke (42), (43) and
severe stroke (38). Both dementia and stroke can share
aggravating common factors such as hypertension (44)
and apolipoprotein E ?4 (45), (46). However, this association
could reflect the patient's frail condition and common
shared factors that all contribute to risk of death
in stroke patients.
Finally, we observed a higher mortality rate in elderly
patients compared to younger patients, but this difference
was no longer significant when other significant risk
factors were taken into account. This particular finding
is markedly different from previous studies, which reported
a higher mortality for in-hospital death (15), (19),
(21) and 1-year mortality (19), (20), (30) in older
patients. Age has been found to be independently associated
with greater mortality (21),(30) using multiple logistic
regression and survival analyses including initial stroke
severity, but one of these studies excluded transient
ischemic attacks and cerebral hemorrhage (21) and both
used different assessment scales.
Our study has some limitations. This was a comparative
study conducted in a single institution, and this might
reflect local medical management. In particular, we
cannot exclude that different practice patterns reflecting
different health care services may have influenced prognosis
or outcome of patients. However, with a 250-bed urban
hospital including an ED, a MRI, and a stroke unit,
our practice can be considered as representative of
stroke management in relation to stroke center admission,
MRI, and use of thrombolytics.
Because our study was performed in an ED, and patients
directly referred to the stroke unit were not considered,
most of the stroke patients included within a 3-hour
admission and fibrinolysis time window, were probably
under-represented in our study because of pre-ED selection
for stroke unit admission.
The choice of the modified Rankin score compared with
other scales for stroke severity may be criticized but
was known to be easily feasible for all physicians in
our ED. Its value in our study could reflect co-morbidity
consequences together with stroke severity. However,
a large majority of our patients were living independently
at home, suggesting that the Rankin score mainly reflected
stroke severity. Overall, our methods were essentially
designed to highlight an association between factors
(age and underuse), but not a causative effect. To analyze
the effect of age on physician's decision in management
and treatment of stroke, a prospective study is needed
with consideration for all factors implicated in medical
decision making.
In conclusion, our results suggest that comorbidities
and disease severity have to be considered more than
age for the management of acute stroke in elderly patients.
The age-related differences observed in our study highlight
the need for new studies dedicated to stroke in elderly
patients and its optimal management.
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank Dr Mohammed Hassen Al-Banouby,
MD (Consultant and Professor Neurologist, Departments
of Neurology and Geriatrics, Ain-Shams University Hospital,
Cairo, Egypt) and Dr Mohammed Abdel-Fatah Al-Okl, MD
(Consultant and Ass. Professor Geriatrician, Department
of Geriatrics Medicine, Ain-Shams University Hospital,
Cairo, Egypt) for reviewing the manuscript.
______________________________________
REFERENCES
[1] Bonita R.: Epidemiology
of stroke. Lancet 339. 342-344.1992.
[2] Barker W.H., Mullooly J.P.: Stroke in a defined
elderly population, 1967-1985. A less lethal and disabling
but no less common disease. Stroke 28. 284-290.1997.
[3] Pohjasvaara T., Erkinjuntti T., Vataja R., et al:
Comparison of stroke features and disability in daily
life in patients with ischemic stroke aged 55 to 70
and 71 to 85 years. Stroke 28. 729-735.1997.
[4] Lehtonen A., Salomaa V., Immonen-Raiha P., et al:
Declining incidence and mortality of stroke in persons
aged > or = 75 years in Finland; the FINSTROKE study.
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 11. 466-470.2004;
[5] American Heart Association : 2001 Heart and Stroke
Statistical Update. American Heart Association Dallas
(Tex) 2000.
[6] Bhalla A., Grieve R., Tilling K., et al: Older stroke
patients in Europe: stroke care and determinants of
outcome. Age and Ageing 33. 618-624.2004.
[7] Rudd A.G., Lowe D., Hoffman A., et al: Secondary
prevention for stroke in the United Kingdom: results
from the National Sentinel Audit of Stroke. Age and
Ageing 33. 280-286.2004.
[8] Aho K., Harmsen P., Hatano S., et al: Cerebrovascular
disease in the community: results of a WHO collaborative
study. Bull World Health Organ 58. 113-130.1980.
[9] Warlow C., Sudlow C., Dennis M., et al: Stroke.Lancet
362. 1211-1224.2003.
[10] Katz S., Ford A.B., Moskowitz R.W., et al: Studies
of illness in the aged. The index of ADL: a standardized
measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA
185. 914-919.1963;
[11] Bonita R., Beaglehole R.: Modification of Rankin
scale: recovery of motor function after stroke. Stroke
19. 1497-1500.1988.
[12] Le Manach Y., Perel A., Coriat P., et al: Early
and delayed myocardial infarction following aortic surgery.
Anesthesiology 102. 885-891.2005.
[13] INSEE : La France en faits et en chiffres. (Access
on July 20, 2007)
[14] Glader E.L., Stegmayr B., Johansson L., et al:
Differences in long-term outcome between patients treated
in stroke units and in general wards: a 2-years follow-up
of stroke patients in Sweden. Stroke 32. 2124-2130.2001.
[15] Henon H., Pasquier F., Durieu I., et al: Preexisting
dementia in stroke patients. Baseline frequency, associated
factors, and outcome. Stroke 28. 2429-2436.1997.
[16] Kong K.H., Chua K.S., Tow A.P.: Clinical characteristics
and functional outcome of stroke patients 75 years old
and older. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 79. 1535-1539.1998.
[17] Jorgensen H.S., Nakayama H., Reith J., et al: Acute
stroke with atrial fibrillation. Copenhagen Stroke Study.
Stroke 27. 1765-1769.1996.
[18] Jorgensen H.S., Reith J., Nakayama H., et al: What
determines good recovery in patients with the most severe
strokes? The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Stroke 30. 2008-2012.1999.
[19] Jorgensen H.S., Kammersgaard L.P., Houth J., et
al: Who benefits from treatment and rehabilitation in
a stroke Unit? A community-based study. Stroke 31. 434-439.2000;
[20] Fagerberg B., Claesson L., Gosman-Hedstrom G.,
et al: Effect of acute stroke unit care integrated with
care continuum versus conventional treatment: A randomized
1-year study of elderly patients: the Goteborg 70+ Stroke
Study. Stroke 31. 2578-2584.2000;
[21] Kammersgaard L.P., Jorgensen H.S., Reith J., et
al: Short-and long-term prognosis for very old stroke
patients. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Age Ageing 33.
149-154.2004;
[22] Kaste M., Palomaki H., Sarna S.: Where and how
should elderly stroke patients be treated? A randomized
trial. Stroke 26. 249-253.1995;
[23] Bateman B.T., Schumacher H.C., Boden-Albala B.,
et al: Factors associated with in-hospital mortality
after administration of thrombolysis in acute ischemic
stroke patients: an analysis of the nationwide inpatient
sample 1999 to 2002. Stroke 37. 440-446.2006;
[24] Berrouschot J., Rother J., Glahn J., et al: Outcome
and severe hemorrhagic complications of intravenous
thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen activator in very
old (> or = 80 years) stroke patients. Stroke 36.
2421-2425.2005;
[25] Sylaja P.N., Cote R., Buchan A.M., et al: Thrombolysis
in patients older than 80 years with acute ischaemic
stroke: Canadian Alteplase for Stroke Effectiveness
Study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 77. 826-829.2006;
[26] Engelter S.T., Reichhart M., Sekoranja L., et al:
Thrombolysis in stroke patients aged 80 years and older:
Swiss survey of IV thrombolysis. Neurology 65. 1795-1798.2005;
[27] Brass L.M., Krumholz H.M., Scinto J.D., et al:
Warfarin use following ischemic stroke among Medicare
patients with atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 158.
2093-2100.1998;
[28] Rudd A.G., Lowe D., Hoffman A., et al: Secondary
prevention for stroke in the United Kingdom: results
from the National Sentinel Audit of Stroke. Age Ageing
33. 280-286.2004;
[29] Fairhead J.F., Rothwell P.M.: Underinvestigation
and undertreatment of carotid disease in elderly patients
with transient ischaemic attack and stroke: comparative
population based study. Br Med J 333. 525-527.2006;
[30] Shen Q., Cordato D., Chan D.K., et al: Identifying
the determinants of 1-year post-stroke outcomes in elderly
patients. Acta Neurol Scand 113. 114-120.2006;
[31] Wang S.L., Pan W.H., Lee M.C., et al: Predictors
of survival among elders suffering strokes in Taiwan:
observation from a nationally representative sample.
Stroke 31. 2354-2360.2000;
[32] Longstreth , Jr , Jr W.T., Bernick C., Fitzpatrick
A., et al: Frequency and predictors of stroke death
in 5,888 participants in the Cardiovascular Health Study.
Neurology 56. 368-375.2001;
[33] Marini C., De Santis F., Sacco S., et al: Contribution
of atrial fibrillation to incidence and outcome of ischemic
stroke: results from a population-based study. Stroke
36. 1115-1119.2005;
[34] Elneihoum A.M., Goransson M., Falke P., et al:
Three-year survival and recurrence after stroke in Malmo,
Sweden: an analysis of stroke registry data. Stroke
29. 2114-2117.1998;
[35] Abu-Zeid H.A., Choi N.W., Hsu P.H., et al: Prognostic
factors in the survival of 1,484 stroke cases observed
for 30 to 48 months. I. Diagnostic types and descriptive
variables. Arch Neurol 35. 121-125.1978;
[36] Brown R.D., Whisnant J.P., Sicks J.D., et al: Stroke
incidence, prevalence, and survival: secular trends
in Rochester, Minnesota, through 1989. Stroke 27. 373-380.1996;
[37] Fried L.P., Kronmal R.A., Newman A.B., et al: Risk
factors for 5-year mortality in older adults: the Cardiovascular
Health Study. JAMA 279. 585-592.1998;
[38] Appelros P., Nydevik I., Seiger A., et al: Predictors
of severe stroke: influence of preexisting dementia
and cardiac disorders. Stroke 33. 2357-2362.2002;
[39] Broderick J.P., Phillips S.J., O'Fallon W.M., et
al: Relationship of cardiac disease to stroke occurrence,
recurrence, and mortality. Stroke 23. 1250-1256.1992;
[40] Lin H.J., Wolf P.A., Kelly-Hayes M., et al: Stroke
severity in atrial fibrillation. The Framingham Study..
Stroke 27. 1760-1764.1996;
[41] Whittle J., Wickenheiser L., Venditti L.N.: Is
warfarin underused in the treatment of elderly persons
with atrial fibrillation?. Arch Intern Med 157. 441-445.1997.
[42] Zhu L., Fratiglioni L., Guo Z., et al: Incidence
of stroke in relation to cognitive function and dementia
in the Kungsholmen Project. Neurology 54. 2103-2107.2000.
[43] Ferrucci L., Guralnik J.M., Salive M.E., et al:
Cognitive impairment and risk of stroke in the older
population. J Am Geriatr Soc 44. 237-241.1996.
[44] Skoog I., Lithell H., Hansson L., et al: Effect
of baseline cognitive function and antihypertensive
treatment on cognitive and cardiovascular outcomes:
Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE).
Am J Hypertens 18. 1052-1059.2005.
[45] Kalmijn S., Feskens E.J., Launer L.J., et al: Cerebrovascular
disease, the apolipoprotein e4 allele, and cognitive
decline in a community-based study of elderly men. Stroke
27. 2230-2235.1996.
[46] Slooter A.J., Tang M.X., van Duijn C.M., et al:
Apolipoprotein E epsilon4 and the risk of dementia with
stroke. A population-based investigation. JAMA 277.
818-821.1997.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|