39 research outputs found

    Diagnosed depression and sociodemographic factors as predictors of mortality in patients with dementia

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Potentially modifiable risk factors for developing dementia have been identified. However, risk factors for increased mortality in patients with diagnosed dementia are not well understood. Identifying factors that influence prognosis would help clinicians plan care and address unmet needs. AIMS: To investigate diagnosed depression and sociodemographic factors as predictors of mortality in patients with dementia in UK secondary clinical care services. METHOD: We conducted a cohort study of patients with a dementia diagnosis in an electronic health records database in a UK National Health Service mental health trust. RESULTS: In 3374 patients with 10 856 person-years of follow-up, comorbid depression was not associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94; 95% CI 0.71-1.24). Single patients had higher mortality than those who were married (adjusted hazard ratio 1.25; 95% CI 1.03-1.50). Patients of Asian ethnicity had lower mortality rates than White British patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.50; 95% CI 0.34-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically diagnosed depression does not increase mortality in patients with dementia. Patients who are single are a potential high-mortality risk group. Lower mortality rates in Asian patients with dementia that have been reported in the USA also apply in the UK. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS: None

    Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis

    No full text
    Background: Stroke is the third leading cause of death and the most common cause of long‐term disability. Severe narrowing (stenosis) of the carotid artery is an important cause of stroke. Surgical treatment (carotid endarterectomy) may reduce the risk of stroke, but carries a risk of operative complications. This is an update of a Cochrane Review, originally published in 1999, and most recently updated in 2017. Objectives: To determine the balance of benefit versus risk of endarterectomy plus best medical management compared with best medical management alone, in people with a recent symptomatic carotid stenosis (i.e. transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non‐disabling stroke). Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal to October 2019. We also reviewed the reference lists of all relevant studies and abstract books from research proceedings. Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carotid artery surgery plus best medical treatment with best medical treatment alone. Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted the data. We assessed the results and the quality of the evidence of the primary and secondary outcomes by the GRADE method, which classifies the quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. Main Results: We included three trials involving 6343 participants. The trials differed in the methods of measuring carotid stenosis and in the definition of stroke. Using the primary electronic data files, we pooled and analysed individual patient data on 6092 participants (35,000 patient‐years of follow‐up), after reassessing the carotid angiograms and outcomes from all three trials, and redefining outcome events where necessary, to achieve comparability. Surgery increased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with less than 30% stenosis (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.56; 2 studies, 1746 participants; high‐quality evidence). Surgery decreased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with 30% to 49% stenosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.19; 2 studies, 1429 participants; high‐quality evidence), was of benefit in participants with 50% to 69% stenosis (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94; 3 studies, 1549 participants; moderate‐quality evidence), and was highly beneficial in participants with 70% to 99% stenosis without near‐occlusion (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.67; 3 studies, 1095 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). However, surgery decreased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with near‐occlusions (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.53; 2 studies, 271 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). Authors' Conclusions: Carotid endarterectomy reduced the risk of recurrent stroke for people with significant stenosis. Endarterectomy might be of some benefit for participants with 50% to 69% symptomatic stenosis (moderate‐quality evidence) and highly beneficial for those with 70% to 99% stenosis (moderate‐quality evidence).</p

    Risk of stroke in relation to degree of asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a population-based cohort study, systematic review, and meta-analysis

    No full text
    Background There is uncertainty around which patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis should be offered surgical intervention. Although stroke rates were unrelated to the degree of stenosis in the medical-treatment-only groups in previous randomised trials, this could simply reflect recruitment bias and there has been no systematic analysis of a stenosis-risk association in cohort studies. We aimed to establish whether there is any association between the degree of asymptomatic stenosis and ipsilateral stroke risk in patients on contemporary medical treatment. Methods We did a prospective population-based study (Oxford Vascular Study; OxVasc), and a systematic review and meta-analysis. All patients in OxVasc with a recent suspected transient ischaemic attack or stroke, between April 1, 2002, and April 1, 2017, who had asymptomatic carotid stenosis were included in these analyses. We commenced contemporary medical treatment and determined ipsilateral stroke risk in this cohort by face-to-face follow-up (to Oct 1, 2020). We also did a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies (from Jan 1, 1980, to Oct 1, 2020) reporting ipsilateral stroke risk in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and included both observational cohort studies and medical treatment groups of randomised controlled trials if the number of patients exceeded 30, ipsilateral stroke rates (or the raw data to calculate these) were provided, and were published in English. Findings Between April 1, 2002, and April 1, 2017, 2354 patients were consecutively enrolled in OxVasc and 2178 patients underwent carotid imaging, of whom 207 had 50–99% asymptomatic stenosis of at least one carotid bifurcation (mean age at imaging: 77·5 years [SD 10·3]; 88 [43%] women). The 5-year ipsilateral stroke risk increased with the degree of stenosis; patients with 70–99% stenosis had a significantly greater 5-year ipsilateral stroke risk than did those with 50–69% stenosis (six [14·6%; 95% CI 3·5–25·7] of 53 patients vs none of 154; p<0·0001); and patients with 80–99% stenosis had a significantly greater 5-year ipsilateral stroke risk than did those with 50–79% stenosis (five [18·3%; 7·7–29·9] of 34 patients vs one [1·0%; 0·0–2·9] of 173; p<0·0001). Of the 56 studies identified in the systematic review (comprising 13 717 patients), 23 provided data on ipsilateral stroke risk fully stratified by degree of asymptomatic stenosis (in 8419 patients). Stroke risk was linearly associated with degree of ipsilateral stenosis (p<0·0001); there was a higher risk in patients with 70–99% stenosis than in those with 50–69% stenosis (386 of 3778 patients vs 181 of 3806 patients; odds ratio [OR] 2·1 [95% CI 1·7–2·5], p<0·0001; 15 cohort studies, three trials) and a higher risk in patients with 80–99% stenosis than in those with 50–79% stenosis (77 of 727 patients vs 167 of 3272 patients; OR 2·5 [1·8–3·5], p<0·0001; 11 cohort studies). Heterogeneity in stroke risk between studies for patients with severe versus moderate stenosis (phet<0·0001) was accounted for by highly discrepant results (pdiff<0·0001) in the randomised controlled trials of endarterectomy compared with cohort studies (trials: pooled OR 0·8 [95% CI 0·6–1·2], phet=0·89; cohorts: 2·9 [2·3–3·7], phet=0·54). Interpretation Contrary to the assumptions of current guidelines and the findings of subgroup analyses of previous randomised controlled trials, the stroke risk reported in cohort studies was highly dependent on the degree of asymptomatic carotid stenosis, suggesting that the benefit of endarterectomy might be underestimated in patients with severe stenosis. Conversely, the 5-year stroke risk was low for patients with moderate stenosis on contemporary medical treatment, calling into question any benefit from revascularisation. Funding NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, Wolfson Foundation, and the British Heart Foundation
    corecore