الفهرس 
CLASSIFICATION AND PATHOPHYSIOLOGYOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 124 |  |  |
| | | from | 124 | | |
Abstract
65
SUMMARY
n Egypt, the overall prevalence rate of stroke is high and it is
a major cause for both morbidity and mortality as well as its
financial burden. LVD and SVD share similar risk factor profiles.
Thus, comparing the risk factor profile of these two subtypes of
stroke may contribute to elucidate their pathology and help in
determining effective preventive strategies.
This study aimed to highlight the prevalence of different
risk factors among small vessel and large vessel subtypes of
ischemic stroke and their impact on stroke severity on admission
and on the outcome of stroke at discharge and at 3, 6 or 12
months follow up, among adult Egyptian as better understanding
of risk factors for stroke will provide insights into pathological
mechanisms, improve our ability to predict vascular risk and aid
the development of new preventive treatments.
This is an observational retrospective - cross sectional
study, that enrolled 238 patients who were admitted at ASUH and
ASUSH stroke centers who have completed six months or one
year since the onset of acute ischemic stroke and suffered from
either LVD or SVD. Data were collected through phone call
questionnaire as patients were contacted and asked about
occurrence of PSE. Other relevant data were obtained from SITS
of ASU and ASUSH stroke centers.
This study found that the prevalence of LVD is (37. 5%)
and of SVD was our study is (25. 8%) and that they are both more
ISummary
66
prevalent in men than women (56. 7% VS 73. 2% were males in
and 43. 3% VS 26. 8% were females respectively). Yet, this
difference was not statistically significant(p=0. 1).
The current study showed non-significant correlation
between HTN, DM, dyslipidemia, previous ischemic stroke and
ISHD with neither LVD nor SVD.
Moreover, regarding severity and long-term outcome of
LVD VS SVD: It is not a surprise that our study found that
NIHSS and mRS were significantly less at all time points in SVD
group denoting less stroke severity as well as more favorable
outcome.
In our study, the percentage of patients with unfavorable
outcome was more among males in LVD and among females in
SVD. Moreover, in both groups the percentage of patients with
unfavorable outcome was more among those positive for each of
the risk factors except for smoking among SVD patients, yet it
wasn’t statistically significant.
Finally, this study found that among LVD and SVD
patients who received rtPA, both had favorable outcome on
discharge compared to patients who didn’t. Yet, SVD patients
who received rtPA had a significantly better outcome on
discharge (p:0. 02). Long term follow up did not show any
significant difference between those who received rTPA and
those who did not among both groups