Refine
Document Type
- Article (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
Institute
- Medizin (3)
Background: Mechanical thrombectomy and systemic thrombolysis are important therapies for stroke patients. However, there is disagreement about the accompanying risk of acute symptomatic seizures.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion was performed. The patients were divided into four groups based on whether they received either mechanical thrombectomy (MT) or systemic thrombolysis (ST; group 1: MT+/ST−; group 2: MT+/ST+; group 3: MT−/ST+; group 4: MT−/ST−). Propensity score matching was conducted for each group combination (1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2, 3:4) using the covariates “NIHSS at admission”, “mRS prior to event” and “age”. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of acute symptomatic seizures.
Results: A total of 987 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 208, 264, 169 and 346 belonged to groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Propensity score matched groups consisted of 160:160, 143:143, 156:156, 144:144, 204:204 and 165:165 patients for the comparisons 1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2 and 3:4, respectively. Based on chi-squared tests, there was no significant difference in the frequency of acute symptomatic seizures between the groups. Subgroups varied in their frequency of acute symptomatic seizures, ranging from 2.8 to 3.8%, 2.8–4.4%, 3.6–3.8% and 4.9–6.3% in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively.
Conclusion: There was no association between MT or ST and an increased risk of acute symptomatic seizures in patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion who were treated at a primary stroke centre.
Background: Patients with epilepsy often require a specialized treatment, which may differ because of the responsibility of the federal states for healthcare policy in Germany.
Objective: State-specific differences in healthcare structures based on inpatient hospital cases of epilepsy patients between 2000 and 2020 in relation to specialized treatment offers.
Material and methods: The inpatient hospital cases of the German federal states were evaluated using the Friedman test and time series trend analysis. A state-specific inpatient undertreatment or overtreatment of inpatient hospital cases outside the registered state was analyzed by comparing residence-related and treatment site-related case numbers with a threshold of ±5%.
Results: After age adjustment, significantly more inpatient cases were found in the “new states” compared to the “old states” (p < 0.001); the highest number of cases nationwide was found in Saarland with 224.8 ± 11.5 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The trend analysis showed an increase in cases until the end of 2016 with a trend reversal from 2017 and a further significant decrease in hospital cases in the COVID year 2020. A relative inpatient undertreatment was shown for Brandenburg, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein and Thuringia. Additional, possibly compensatory, inpatient care was found for all city states (Hamburg, Bremen and Berlin) and Baden-Wuerttemberg. In federal states with a relative inpatient undertreatment and/or high inpatient hospital case numbers, there was often a lower availability of specialized epilepsy centers, specialized outpatient clinics and epilepsy outpatient clinics.
Conclusion: In Germany there are state-specific differences in the structure of care, with higher inpatient hospital care in the “new states” and Saarland. In addition, there were federal states with disproportionately higher treatment of patients not registered in this federal state. A potential influencing factor may be the availability of centers with specialized treatment for epilepsy patients.