2016
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-016-0276-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intracerebral Hemorrhage Location and Functional Outcomes of Patients: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: Multiple studies have examined motor-centric outcomes, with few studies examining quality of life (QoL) or cognition. Better functional outcomes have been suggested for lobar versus non-lobar ICH; few studies attempted finer topographic comparisons. This study highlights the need for improved reporting in ICH outcomes research, including a detailed description of hemorrhage location, reporting of the full range of functional outcome scales, and inclusion of cognitive and QoL outcomes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

2
45
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
45
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…To directly compare differences between the mRS and BI, percentages of “good outcomes” were calculated using mRS < 3 and BI ≥ 85 as respective cut-offs. Cut-offs of good outcome were chosen based on their commonality within ICH research and clinical trials[16,18,19]. To specifically assess significant differences in the distribution of mRS scores (i.e.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To directly compare differences between the mRS and BI, percentages of “good outcomes” were calculated using mRS < 3 and BI ≥ 85 as respective cut-offs. Cut-offs of good outcome were chosen based on their commonality within ICH research and clinical trials[16,18,19]. To specifically assess significant differences in the distribution of mRS scores (i.e.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…BI ≥ 95) at 100 days post-injury[15]; however, to our knowledge the BI has not been used to evaluate survivors beyond this time-point in any prospective observational ICH study. Additionally, while the mRS is commonly used to assess outcome in ICH patients[16], there has been little focus on understanding the burden of disability at various time-points. As new interventions for ICH patients are being developed, choosing proper end-points as well as clinically relevant assessments are important for well-designed trials.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, one has to keep in mind that various previous studies of ICH used different definitions of deep and lobar ICH. 10,11,15 Nonetheless, the retrospective and singlecenter design as well as the small sample size in each group undermined further statistical adjusting to minimize volumerelated effects on outcome. Furthermore, we may have missed specific ICH causes that were unmasked on follow-up imaging after hospital discharge as these imaging findings were not assessed.…”
Section: March 2017mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[3][4][5] In supratentorial ICH, comparison of patients with lobar and deep ICH revealed outcome benefits for patients with lobar ICH. [6][7][8][9][10][11] However, within lobar ICH, a specific comparison on affected lobe and clinical outcome is lacking.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation