Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Stroke. 2003;34:e166-e167
Published online before print August 21, 2003, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000091274.71903.1C
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/9/e166    most recent
01.STR.0000091274.71903.1Cv1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Blakely, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Blakely, J. A.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Antibiotics
*Stroke

(Stroke. 2003;34:e166.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.


Research Reports

Editorial Comment—Antibiotics and Stroke

John A. Blakely, BA, MD, FRCPC, Guest Editor

Anticoagulant Clinic, Sunnybrook & Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada


An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.
 

It is sobering to consider that despite its prevalence and prominence, the cause of atherosclerosis remains unknown. In this issue of Stroke, Brassard et al have addressed its intriguing association with inflammation. If infection plays a role in the genesis of vascular events such as stroke, might antibiotics reduce their incidence?

Briefly, Brassard et al examined retrospectively a large data set of elderly hypertensive patients beginning therapy and, after adjustment for confounders, found that antibiotic use, particularly penicillin, was negatively associated with stroke. They noted a "protective association."

Enthusiasm for a conclusion supporting a popular and intriguing hypothesis should be tempered by consideration of exactly what was done and what was found. Two principles are helpful in assessing the strength of this evidence:

First, in science, an answer cannot be more specific than the question it addresses.

Second, causation cannot be deduced from association.

With regard to the first issue, the hypothesis of the present study was that "subjects treated with antibiotics may be at lower risk of developing clinical manifestations such as cerebrovascular disease." Of the 6 defined antibiotic groups, 3 were associated with fewer strokes, 3 with more. (Patients who had received penicillins, macrolides, and fluoroquinolones experienced somewhat fewer strokes; those receiving tetracyclines, cephalosporins, and other antibiotics experienced somewhat more.) Overall the odds ratio was 0.99 for current use, 0.98 for recent, and 0.99 for past use. Adjustment for confounders resulted in odds ratios of 0.80, 0.81, and 0.87, respectively, and a "statistically significant" negative association for . . . [Full Text of this Article]