This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 37/10/2454    most recent 01.STR.0000240072.86151.afv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Topakian, R. Articles by Aichner, F. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Topakian, R. Articles by Aichner, F. T.

(Stroke. 2006;37:2454.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.

Letters to the Editor

Admission C-Reactive Protein as a Predictor for Stroke Outcome Among Candidates for Thrombolysis: Decision Adjourned

Department of Neurology, Wagner-Jauregg Hospital, Linz, Austria

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

To the Editor:

We read with interest the article by Montaner et al¹ in which the authors claim that poststroke C-reactive protein (CRP) is a powerful prognostic tool among candidates for intravenous thrombolysis. The study raises several methodological and clinical questions.

Patients with baseline CRP >6 mg/dL were excluded from the study because of probable infection before stroke. The rationale behind this arbitrary cut-point was not mentioned, as CRP values of, say, 3 mg/dL may still be indicative of underlying infection. A lower cut-point may have resulted in other predictive values of admission CRP.

The authors did not report on the number of patients taking statins which may have confounded the measured CRP levels because statins have been shown to reduce CRP levels.²

No comment was also found regarding baseline body temperature and its possible correlation with CRP and outcome. If infections were the main cause of mortality in patients with high admission CRP values, regimen of antibiotics and the timing of its start may have influenced outcome in some patients. Despite the moderate cohort size, data on the clinically suspected causes of death seem important.

It would also be helpful to know the mean time intervals between stroke onset and start of treatment, and the mean time intervals between stroke onset and CRP measurement.

Single measurement of laboratory values may either overestimate or underestimate the strength of the relationship of the potential predictor and the end point because of measurement errors and fluctuations of laboratory levels in individuals. The . . . [Full Text of this Article]