4.7 Article

Epidemiology of Subarachnoid Hemorrhage, Patterns of Management, and Outcomes in China: A Hospital-Based Multicenter Prospective Study

期刊

CNS NEUROSCIENCE & THERAPEUTICS
卷 18, 期 11, 页码 895-902

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/cns.12001

关键词

Aneurysm; Death rate; Health policy; Subarachnoid hemorrhage; Surgery

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology
  2. Ministry of Health of China
  3. National Science and Technology Major Project of China [2008ZX09312 -008]
  4. State Key Development Program of (for) Basic Research of China [2009CB521905]
  5. Beijing Public Health System Special Projects of High-level Training for Medical Technologist [2009-3-27]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To conduct a large-scale analysis on epidemiology, management, and outcomes of spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), and to investigate the current situation of aneurysm obliteration in China. Methods: A multicenter prospective cohort study involving 132 hospitals throughout China from September 2007 to August 2008 was conducted. A total of 651 patients with spontaneous SAH were evaluated. Results: The most frequent type of SAH was aneurysmal SAH (77.4%), followed by uncommon causes (17.5%) and uncertain etiologies (5.1%). For aneurysmal SAH, the cumulative mortality at 28 days, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months was 16.9%, 21.2%, 23.6%, and 24.6%, respectively. Obliteration of aneurysms, age, Hunt and Hess grade, and history of stroke affected the 12-month mortality. In multiple regression analysis, the region, type of hospital, patient's age, history of hypertension, and nonintraventricular hemorrhage impacted aneurysm obliteration. Conclusion: Aneurysmal rupture is the most common cause of spontaneous SAH in China. The percentage of aneurysm obliteration is still low in China that seems to contribute to long-term mortality. With continued training of specialists, proper allocation of healthcare resources, and establishment of stroke centers, the rate of securing aneurysms is expected to rise.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据