Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Published Online First: 17 April 2008. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2008.145698
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 2008;79:1079-1081
Copyright © 2008 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

SHORT REPORTS

Utility of the stroke-thrombolytic predictive instrument

M Uyttenboogaart1, R E Stewart2, P C Vroomen1, G-J Luijckx1, J De Keyser1

1 Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
2 Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

M Uyttenboogaart, MD, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands; m.uyttenboogaart{at}neuro.umcg.nl

Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of the stroke thrombolytic predictive instrument (s-TPI) in predicting clinical outcome in patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA).

Methods: The study assessed the external validity of the s-TPI in 301 consecutive stroke patients treated with intravenous t-PA. Clinical outcome was measured with the modified Rankin scale (mRs) at 3 months. The study used the s-TPI to calculate probabilities of a good outcome (mRs 0–1) and a poor outcome (mRs 5–6). We compared these probabilities with the observed outcome using receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) curves and calibration curves. Subgroup analyses for different onset-to-treatment time windows were performed.

Results: According to the s-TPI, the mean predicted probability of a good and a poor outcome in the validation cohort were 0.45 and 0.17. The area under the ROC curves were 0.80 (4.5-hour time window), 0.82 (3-hour time window) and 0.77 (3–4.5 hours time window) for predicting good outcome, and 0.78 (4.5 hours), 0.80 (3 hours) and 0.74 (3–4.5 hours) for predicting poor outcome. Calibration curves revealed a slight overestimation of probabilities of a good outcome and underestimation of probabilities of a poor outcome.

Conclusions: The s-TPI appears to be reasonably valid for predicting outcome after t-PA treatment in daily practice, although a slight overestimation of a good and underestimation of a poor outcome was observed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

BMJ Careers - Latest neurology and neurosurgery jobs

Neurology and neurosurgery jobs