Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Background and Purpose— There is debate over an optimal systolic blood pressure (SBP) in secondary stroke prevention of patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (sICAS). We investigated whether translesional pressure gradient across sICAS would alter the relationship between SBP and risk of recurrent stroke in such patients. Methods— We recruited patients with sICAS (50%–99% stenosis) confirmed in computed tomography angiography. We simulated blood flow across sICAS with computed tomography angiography-based computational fluid dynamics models. Translesional pressure ratio (PR=Pressure post-stenotic /Pressure pre-stenotic ) was calculated in each case. Pressure ratio (PR) ≤ median was defined as low PR, indicating larger translesional pressure gradient across sICAS. All patients received optimal medical treatment. We investigated the interaction of translesional PR and mean SBP during follow-up (SBP FU ) in determining the risk of the primary outcome, recurrent ischemic stroke in the same territory within 1 year. Results— Among 157 patients with sICAS, the median PR was 0.93. Multivariate Cox regression revealed significant PR-SBP FU interaction on the primary outcome ( P =0.008): in patients with normal PR, risk of primary outcome significantly decreased with lower SBP FU (hazard ratio for 10 mm Hg decrement =0.46; P =0.018); however, in those with low PR, SBP FU ≤130 mm Hg was associated with significantly increased risk of primary outcome, compared with 130

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1161/strokeaha.119.028616

Type

Journal article

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Publication Date

2020-06-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

51

Pages

1862 - 1864

Total pages

2