首页> 外文期刊>BMC Neurology >Prevalence and risk factors of intracranial and extracranial artery stenosis in asymptomatic rural residents of 13 villages in China
【24h】

Prevalence and risk factors of intracranial and extracranial artery stenosis in asymptomatic rural residents of 13 villages in China

机译:中国13个村庄无症状农村居民颅内和颅外动脉狭窄的患病率及危险因素

获取原文
           

摘要

Background The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors for extracranial carotid artery stenosis (ECAS) and intracranial carotid artery stenosis (ICAS) simultaneously in asymptomatic Chinese pure rural population. Methods We analyzed 2589 asymptomatic subjects aged over 30?yr. by ultrasonography and transcranial Doppler simultaneously in 13 isolated villages by door-to-door investigation. Both ECAS and ICAS were defined as more than 50% stenosis. Demographics, medical history documentation, and investigation of biochemical results were performed for each subject. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to assess the risk factors associated with ECAS and ICAS, respectively. Results One hundred twenty-two (4.7%) residents with ICAS and 56 (2.2%) with ECAS were found in 2589 subjects. Three factors emerged as independent risk factors for ICAS: age (95% confidence interval [CI]?=?1.01–1.04, odds ratio [OR]?=?1.07), hypertension (95% CI?=?1.98–4.37, OR?=?2.94), and diabetes mellitus (95% CI?=?1.72–4.38, OR?=?2.75). As for ECAS, five factors presented as independent risk factors: age (95% CI?=?1.09–1.11, OR?=?1.10), male sex (95% CI?=?1.01–1.02, OR?=?1.01), diabetes mellitus (95% CI?=?1.10–2.12, OR?=?1.53), systolic blood pressure (95% CI?=?1.95–2.88, OR?=?2.37), and total cholesterol (95% CI?=?1.00–1.13, OR?=?1.06). Conclusions ICAS and ECAS were relatively common among asymptomatic rural Chinese subjects. Although they shared similar risk factors, differences still existed between them.
机译:背景技术本研究旨在调查无症状的中国纯农村人群同时颅外颈动脉狭窄(ECAS)和颅内颈动脉狭窄(ICAS)的患病率和危险因素。方法我们分析了2589名30岁以上的无症状受试者。通过超声检查和经颅多普勒检查同时在13个偏远村庄进行逐户调查。 ECAS和ICAS均被定义为狭窄率超过50%。对每个受试者进行了人口统计学,病史记录和生化结果调查。采用单因素和多因素逻辑回归分析分别评估与ECAS和ICAS相关的危险因素。结果在2589名受试者中,有一百二十二名(4.7%)ICAS居民和56名(2.2%)ECAS居民。 ICAS的独立危险因素来自以下三个因素:年龄(95%置信区间[CI]?=?1.01-1.04,优势比[OR]?=?1.07),高血压(95%CI?=?1.98-4.37,或?=?2.94)和糖尿病(95%CI?=?1.72-4.38,OR?=?2.75)。至于ECAS,有五个因素被表示为独立的危险因素:年龄(95%CI ≤1.01–1.11,OR≤= 1.10),男性(95%CI≤1.01-1.02或OR = 1.01)。 ,糖尿病(95%CI?=?1.10–2.12,OR?=?1.53),收缩压(95%CI?=?1.95-2.88,OR?=?2.37)和总胆固醇(95%CI? =?1.00–1.13,或?== 1.06)。结论ICAS和ECAS在无症状的中国农村人群中相对普遍。尽管它们具有相似的风险因素,但它们之间仍然存在差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号