Ulrike Hammerbeck , Philippe Balancy , Matthew Gittins , Adrian Parry-Jones
{"title":"Differences in subacute motor recovery after intracerebral haemorrhage and ischaemic stroke: Analysis using the VISTA database cohort","authors":"Ulrike Hammerbeck , Philippe Balancy , Matthew Gittins , Adrian Parry-Jones","doi":"10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2025.108266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Motor impairment is a significant contributor to disability after stroke, but recovery is often incomplete. Whether motor recovery differs between intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), a subgroup of stroke with far worse outcomes, and ischaemic stroke is not clear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We performed a retrospective observational longitudinal cohort study using individual patient-level data from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA) database (ICH n=892, ischaemic stroke n=6912). Differences in motor recovery to 90-days were examined between ICH and ischaemic stroke patients with mixed effect regression models adjusted for <em>a priori</em> determined confounders. Motor weakness was measured by NIHSS face, arm and leg sum with secondary analyses of total NIHSS, and NIHSS language score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Recovery was observed in all NIHSS domains for both stroke types to 30-days (NIHSS<sub>motor</sub> <em>b</em>=-2.78, 95%CI -2.89,-2.68; NIHSS<sub>total</sub> <em>b</em>=-5.74, 95%CI -5.92,-5.56; NIHSS<sub>language</sub> <em>b</em>=-0.28 95%CI -0.31,-0.24) and 90-days (NIHSS<sub>motor</sub> <em>b</em>=-3.62, 95%CI -3.69,-3.54<em>;</em> NIHSS<sub>total</sub> <em>b</em>=-7.17, 95%CI -7.30,-7.05; NIHSS<sub>language</sub> <em>b</em>=-0.74, 95%CI -0.78,-0.71). Baseline impairment between groups was well matched with only motor impairment being slightly greater in ICH; NIHSS<sub>motor</sub> mean(SD)=13.0 (5.3) vs 12.3 (5.4). To 30-days the extent of recovery was not different between stroke types but recovery to 90-days was greater in ICH for motor and statistically significant for total NIHSS score (<em>b</em>=-0.35, 95%CI -0.71,-0.002). Ischaemic stroke survivors recovered more in NIHSS language domain.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Timing and extent of recovery is different between stroke types. Motor recovery in ICH is greater and occurs later. Therefore, the assumption that most recovery occurs within 30-days and proportionality of recovery should be revisited in this population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases","volume":"34 5","pages":"Article 108266"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105230572500045X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Motor impairment is a significant contributor to disability after stroke, but recovery is often incomplete. Whether motor recovery differs between intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), a subgroup of stroke with far worse outcomes, and ischaemic stroke is not clear.
Methods
We performed a retrospective observational longitudinal cohort study using individual patient-level data from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA) database (ICH n=892, ischaemic stroke n=6912). Differences in motor recovery to 90-days were examined between ICH and ischaemic stroke patients with mixed effect regression models adjusted for a priori determined confounders. Motor weakness was measured by NIHSS face, arm and leg sum with secondary analyses of total NIHSS, and NIHSS language score.
Results
Recovery was observed in all NIHSS domains for both stroke types to 30-days (NIHSSmotorb=-2.78, 95%CI -2.89,-2.68; NIHSStotalb=-5.74, 95%CI -5.92,-5.56; NIHSSlanguageb=-0.28 95%CI -0.31,-0.24) and 90-days (NIHSSmotorb=-3.62, 95%CI -3.69,-3.54; NIHSStotalb=-7.17, 95%CI -7.30,-7.05; NIHSSlanguageb=-0.74, 95%CI -0.78,-0.71). Baseline impairment between groups was well matched with only motor impairment being slightly greater in ICH; NIHSSmotor mean(SD)=13.0 (5.3) vs 12.3 (5.4). To 30-days the extent of recovery was not different between stroke types but recovery to 90-days was greater in ICH for motor and statistically significant for total NIHSS score (b=-0.35, 95%CI -0.71,-0.002). Ischaemic stroke survivors recovered more in NIHSS language domain.
Conclusions
Timing and extent of recovery is different between stroke types. Motor recovery in ICH is greater and occurs later. Therefore, the assumption that most recovery occurs within 30-days and proportionality of recovery should be revisited in this population.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases publishes original papers on basic and clinical science related to the fields of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases. The Journal also features review articles, controversies, methods and technical notes, selected case reports and other original articles of special nature. Its editorial mission is to focus on prevention and repair of cerebrovascular disease. Clinical papers emphasize medical and surgical aspects of stroke, clinical trials and design, epidemiology, stroke care delivery systems and outcomes, imaging sciences and rehabilitation of stroke. The Journal will be of special interest to specialists involved in caring for patients with cerebrovascular disease, including neurologists, neurosurgeons and cardiologists.