Association of apolipoprotein E polymorphism with outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A preliminary study

63Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background and Purpose - Variation in the outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is not fully explained by known prognostic factors. APOE genotype is the most important genetic determinant of susceptibility to Alzheimer's disease, and it is also shown to be associated with the outcome after traumatic brain injury. We studied the association of apolipoprotein E polymorphism with the outcome after aneurysmal SAH. Methods - A total of 160 consecutive patients were admitted after SAH to a neurosurgical unit. The clinical assessment after the SAH was performed with the Hunt and Hess grading scale. The severity of the bleeding as visualized on CT was assessed by Fisher's grading system. Outcome was assessed with the Glasgow Outcome Scale. APOE genotypes were determined by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism. Results - 126 patients had aneurysmatic SAH, and detailed information on outcome and APOE genotype was available for 108 patients (86%). Sixteen (40%) of 40 patients with APOE ε4 had an unfavorable outcome compared with 13 (19%) of 68 without the APOE ε4 allele (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.18 to 6.77). Association was more significant after adjustment for age, rebleeding, clinical status on admission, and CT scan findings (OR 7.1, 95% CI 1.9 to 26.3; P=0.0035). Conclusions - Our findings show a significant genetic association of APOE polymorphism with outcome after spontaneous aneurysmal SAH. Genetic factors thus seem to explain a part of individual differences in the recovery of SAH.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Niskakangas, T., Öhman, J., Niemelä, M., Ilveskoski, E., Kunnas, T. A., & Karhunen, P. J. (2001). Association of apolipoprotein E polymorphism with outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A preliminary study. Stroke, 32(5), 1181–1184. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.32.5.1181

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free