RESUMO
The effects of thrombolysis in seizure and epilepsy after acute ischemic stroke have been poorly explored. In this study, we examine risk factors and consequences of intravenous rt-PA for treatment of acute ischemic stroke. In a retrospective cohort study we evaluate risk factors for seizure and epilepsy after stroke thrombolysis, as well as the impact of seizures and epilepsy in outcome of stroke patients. In our cohort, mean age of patients was 67.2 years old (SD = 13.1) and 79 of them (51.6%) were male and. Initial NIHSS mean score were 10.95 (SD = 6.25). Three months NIHSS mean score was 2.09 (SD = 3.55). Eighty seven (56.9%) patients were mRS of 0-1 after thrombolysis. Hemorrhagic transformation was observed in 22 (14.4%) patients. Twenty-one (13.7%) patients had seizures and 15 (9.8%) patients developed epilepsy after thrombolysis. Seizures were independently associated with hemorrhagic transformation (OR = 3.26; 95% CI = 1.08-9.78; p = 0.035) and with mRS ≥ 2 at 3 months after stroke (OR = 3.51; 95% CI = 1.20-10.32; p = 0.022). Hemorrhagic transformation (OR = 3.55; 95% CI = 1.11-11.34; p = 0.033) and mRS ≥ 2 at 3 months (OR = 5.82; 95% CI = 1.45-23.42; p = 0.013) were variables independently associated with post-stroke epilepsy. In our study, independent risks factors for poor outcome in stroke thrombolysis were age (OR = 1.03; 95% CI = 1.01-1.06; p = 0.011), higher NIHSS (OR = 1.08; 95% CI = 1.03-1.14; p = 0.001), hemorrhagic transformation (OR = 2.33; 95% CI = 1.11-4.76; p = 0.024), seizures (OR = 3.07; 95% CI = 1.22-7.75; p = 0.018) and large cortical area (ASPECTS ≤ 7) (OR = 2.04; 95% CI = 1.04-3.84; p = 0.036). Concluding, in this retrospective cohort study, the neurological impairment after thrombolysis (but not before) and hemorrhagic transformation remained independent risk factors for seizures or post-stroke epilepsy after thrombolysis. Moreover, we observed that seizures emerged as an independent risk factor for poor outcome after thrombolysis therapy in stroke patients (OR = 3.07; 95% CI = 1.22-7.75; p = 0.018).
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is an emergent problem among patients with epilepsy. Here, we evaluate and compare the diagnostic yield and accuracy of different MetS criteria among adult patients with epilepsy to further explore the best strategy for diagnosis of MetS among patients with epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five epileptic adults from a tertiary epilepsy reference center were prospectively recruited over 22 weeks in a cross-sectional study. MetS was defined according to five international criteria used for the diagnosis of the condition [ATP3, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), International Diabetes Federation (IDF), AHA/NHLBI, and harmonized criteria]. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (NPVs), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve were estimated for each criterion. RESULTS: In our sample, adult patients with epilepsy showed a high prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. However, the prevalence of MetS was significantly different according to each criterion used, ranging from 33.7%, as defined by AACE, to 49.4%, as defined by the harmonized criteria (p < 0.005). IDF criteria showed the highest sensitivity [S = 95.5% (95% CI 84.5-99.4), p < 0.05] and AACE criteria showed the lowest sensitivity and NPV [S = 68.2% (95% CI 52.4-81.4), p < 0.05; NPV = 75.8% (95% CI 62.3-86.1), p < 0.05]. ROC curve for all criteria studied showed that area under curve (AUC) for IDF criterion was 0.966, and it was not different from AUC of harmonized criterion (p = 0.092) that was used as reference. On the other hand, the use of the other three criteria for MetS resulted in significantly lower performance, with AUC for AHA/NHLBI = 0.920 (p = 0.0147), NCEP/ATP3 = 0.898 (p = 0.0067), AACE = 0.830 (p = 0.00059). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that MetS might be highly prevalent among adult patients with epilepsy. Despite significant variations in the yield of different criteria, the harmonized definition produced the highest prevalence rates and perhaps should be preferred. Correct evaluation of these patients might improve the rates of detection of MetS and foster primary prevention of cardiovascular events in this population.
