Predicting outcome after acute ischemic stroke

Objective: To externally validate two prognostic models predicting functional outcome and survival 100 days after acute ischemic stroke. Methods: Using prospectively collected data from 1,470 patients, the authors evaluated two previously developed models. Model I predicts incomplete functional recovery (Barthel Index <95) vs complete functional recovery with 11 variables, whereas model II predicts mortality vs survival with 3 variables. On admission to a participating hospital, patients were registered prospectively and included according to defined criteria. Within 72 hours, predictive variables under investigation were assessed. Follow-up was performed 100 days after the event. Results: Model I correctly predicted 68.1% of the patients who had incompletely recovered or had died and 85.7% of the completely recovered patients, model II 46.9% of the patients who had died and 95.9% of the surviving patients. Both models performed better than the treating physicians’ predictions made within 72 hours after admission. Conclusion: The resulting prognostic models are useful to correctly stratify treatment groups in clinical trials and to accurately predict the distribution of endpoint variables.

[1]  A. Ziegler,et al.  Age and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score Within 6 Hours After Onset Are Accurate Predictors of Outcome After Cerebral Ischemia: Development and External Validation of Prognostic Models , 2003, Stroke.

[2]  C. Warlow,et al.  Performance of a Statistical Model to Predict Stroke Outcome in the Context of a Large, Simple, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Feeding , 2003, Stroke.

[3]  D. Wagner,et al.  Predicting Outcome in Ischemic Stroke: External Validation of Predictive Risk Models , 2003, Stroke.

[4]  I. König,et al.  Predicting functional outcome and survival after acute ischemic stroke , 2002, Journal of Neurology.

[5]  C. Warlow,et al.  Predicting Outcome After Acute and Subacute Stroke: Development and Validation of New Prognostic Models , 2002, Stroke.

[6]  M. Dennis,et al.  Systematic Review of Prognostic Models in Patients with Acute Stroke , 2001, Cerebrovascular Diseases.

[7]  Brian Silver,et al.  A three-item scale for the early prediction of stroke recovery , 2001, The Lancet.

[8]  David B. Matchar,et al.  Improving the Reliability of Stroke Subgroup Classification Using the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) Criteria , 2001, Stroke.

[9]  C. Counsell,et al.  Assessment of clinical outcomes in acute stroke trials. , 1998, Stroke.

[10]  R. Kay Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials , 1998, The Journal of international medical research.

[11]  T. Brott,et al.  Improved Reliability of the NIH Stroke Scale Using Video Training , 1994, Stroke.

[12]  J. Booth,et al.  Resampling-Based Multiple Testing. , 1994 .

[13]  P. J. Verweij,et al.  Cross-validation in survival analysis. , 1993, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  R. Bloch,et al.  Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. , 1988, Stroke.

[15]  R. McKelvey,et al.  A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables , 1975 .