Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Jul 26, 2022; 10(21): 7265-7274
Published online Jul 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i21.7265
Published online Jul 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i21.7265
Table 1 Number of subjects recruited at each center
Center | Experimental group (n = 198) | Control group (n = 201) | Total (n = 399) |
Seventh Medical Center of PLA General Hospital | 0 | 92 | 92 |
First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University | 38 | 32 | 70 |
People’s Hospital of Liaoning Province | 40 | 0 | 40 |
Cangzhou People’s Hospital | 31 | 42 | 73 |
Second People’s Hospital of Huai’an | 39 | 35 | 74 |
Ganyu District People’s Hospital of Lianyungang | 50 | 0 | 50 |
Table 2 Baseline information of patients in the two groups
Male (n, %) | Age (yr) | Height (cm) | Weight (kg) | Heart rate (beats/min) | Body temperature (℃) | Systolic pressure (mmHg) | Diastolic pressure (mmHg) | |
Experimental group (n = 198) | 109 (55.3) | 65.57 ± 10.47 | 164.83± 7.28 | 65.12 ± 9.191 | 76.9 ± 14.34 | 36.42 ± 0.33 | 147.48 ± 23.20 | 84.23 ± 14.00 |
Control group (n = 201) | 132 (65.7) | 64.87 ± 10.75 | Missing | Missing | 78.2 ± 15.80 | 36.43 ± 0.34 | 150.30 ± 24.11 | 84.57 ± 14.43 |
Statistic | 4.46 | 0.42 | 0.23 | 0.28 | 0.52 | 0.04 | 1.44 | 0.567 |
P value | 0.35 | 0.674 | 0.6313 | 0.5939 | 0.603 | 0.965 | 0.15 | 0.57 |
Table 3 Changes in baseline total National Institutes of Health stroke scale scores at each follow-up visit
Experimental group (n = 198) | Control group (n = 201) | Rank-sum test | P value | |
Baseline (day 0) | 3.40 ± 2.08 | 3.63 ± 2.72 | 0.495 | 0.621 |
Visit 1 (days 7 ± 2) | 1.75 ± 2.03 | 2.34 ± 2.37 | 1.588 | 0.056 |
Relative to baseline | -1.67 ± 2.11 | -1.25 ± 2.62 | 300.727 | < 0.0001 |
Visit 2 (days 14 ± 2) | 1.65 ± 1.90 | 2.45 ± 2.26 | 8.138 | < 0.0001 |
Relative to baseline | -2.33 ± 2.33 | -1.45 ± 2.36 | 222.404 | < 0.0001 |
Visit 3 (days 21 ± 3) | 2.33 ± 1.63 | 5.0 ± 3.54 | 2.207 | 0.016 |
Relative to baseline | -2.50 ± 2.32 | -1.67 ± 4.12 | 16.19 | < 0.0001 |
Table 4 Efficacy of medications in the two groups, n (%)
Experimental group (n = 198) | Control group (n = 201) | χ2 | P value | ||
Visit 1 (days 7 ± 2) | Marked response | 128 (64.64) | 97 (48.26) | 11.60 | 0.003 |
Mild response | 67 (33.84) | 102 (50.75) | |||
No response | 3 (1.51) | 2 (0.99) | |||
Visit 2 (days 14 ± 2) | Marked response | 62 (74.7) | 64 (45.4) | 835.36 | < 0.0001 |
Mild response | 21 (25.30) | 75 (53.2) | |||
No response | 0 | 2 (1.41) | |||
Visit 3 (days 21 ± 3) | Marked response | 4 (66.7) | 2 (22.2) | 887.40 | < 0.0001 |
Mild response | 2 (33.3) | 6 (66.7) | |||
No response | 0 (0) | 1 (11.1) | |||
Visit 1 (days 7 ± 2) | Overall response | 195 (98.48) | 199 (99.01) | 0.121 | 0.728 |
No response | 3 (1.52) | 2 (0.99) | |||
Visit 2 (days 14 ± 2) | Overall response | 83 (100) | 139 (98.59) | 403.127 | < 0.0001 |
No response | 0 | 2 (1.41) | |||
Visit 3 (days 21 ± 3) | Overall response | 6 (100) | 8 (88.89) | 9.63 | 0.0019 |
No response | 0 | 1 (11.11) |
Table 5 Distribution of modified Rankin scale scores in the two groups
Experimental group (n = 198) | Control group (n = 201) | Rank-sum test | P value | |
Baseline | 1.88 | 0.3903 | ||
No symptom | 15 (7.6) | 48 (23.6) | ||
No significant disability | 132 (66.7) | 95 (47.8) | ||
Mild disability | 38 (19.2) | 41 (20.2) | ||
Moderate disability | 7 (3.5) | 9 (4.4) | ||
Moderately severe disability | 6 (3.0) | 8 (3.9) | ||
Severe disability | 0 | 0 | ||
Visit 1 (days 7 ± 2) | 11.66154 | 0.020 | ||
No symptom | 119 (60.1) | 89 (44.8) | ||
No significant disability | 57 (28.8) | 86 (42.4) | ||
Mild disability | 16 (8.1) | 17 (8.4) | ||
Moderate disability | 6 (3.0) | 7 (3.4) | ||
Moderately severe disability | 0 | 2 (1.0) | ||
Severe disability | 0 | 0 | ||
Visit 2 (days 14 ± 2) | 6.098 | 0.192 | ||
No symptom | 46 (55.4%) | 59 (41.8%) | ||
No significant disability | 29 (34.9%) | 62 (44.0%) | ||
Mild disability | 8 (9.6%) | 15 (10.6%) | ||
Moderate disability | 0 | 4 (2.8%) | ||
Moderately severe disability | 0 | 1 (0.7%) | ||
Severe disability | 0 | 0 |
Table 6 Propensity score matching between the experimental group and control group
Factors | Before propensity score; Experimental group (n = 198) | Control group (n = 201) | P value | After propensity score; Experimental group (n = 111) | Control group (n = 111) | P value |
Combined medication based on vitamins | -0.331 | 0.288 | 0.25 | 0.375 | 0.91 | 0.34 |
Combined medication based on Chinese patent medicine | 0.539 | 0.31 | 0.082 | 0.147 | 0.17 | 0.68 |
Combined medication based on neurotrophic agents | 0.575 | 0.225 | 0.011 | -0.193 | 0.467 | 0.494 |
Combined medication based on free-radical scavengers | -1.823 | 0.245 | 0 | -0.017 | 0.003 | 0.955 |
Concomitant medication for respiratory diseases | -1.182 | 0.44 | 0.007 | -0.032 | 0.003 | 0.953 |
Concomitant medication for genitourinary diseases | -0.638 | 0.557 | 0.252 | 0.279 | 0.197 | 0.657 |
Concomitant medication for coronary heart disease | 0.414 | 0.423 | 0.328 | 0.512 | 1.085 | 0.298 |
- Citation: Zhang WW, Xin J, Zhang GY, Zhai QJ, Zhang HM, Wu CS. Efficacy of Guhong injection versus Butylphthalide and Sodium Chloride Injection for mild ischemic stroke: A multicenter controlled study. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(21): 7265-7274
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i21/7265.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i21.7265