Evidence Hub

Risk of stroke early after transient ischaemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Giles MF, Rothwell PM

The Lancet. Neurology, 2007

10 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Stroke is often preceded by transient ischaemic attack (TIA), but studies of stroke risk after TIA are logistically difficult and have yielded conflicting results. However, reliable estimation of this risk is necessary for planning effective service provision, clinical trials, and public education. We therefore did a systematic review of all studies of stroke risk early after TIA.

METHODS: All studies of stroke risk within 7 days of TIA were identified by use of electronic databases and by hand searches of reference lists, relevant journals, and conference abstracts. Stroke risks at 2 days and 7 days after TIA were calculated overall and analyses for heterogeneity were done, if possible, after categorisation by study method, setting, population, and treatment.

FINDINGS: 18 independent cohorts were included, which reported stroke risk in 10 126 TIA patients. The pooled stroke risk was 5.2% (95% CI 3.9-6.5) at 7 days, but there was substantial heterogeneity between studies (p<0.0001), with risks ranging from 0% to 12.8%. However, the risks reported in individual studies over different durations of follow-up were highly correlated (0-7 days vs 8-90 days, r=0.89, p<0.0001), and the heterogeneity between studies was almost fully explained by study method, setting, and treatment. The lowest risks were seen in studies of emergency treatment in specialist stroke services (0.9% [95% CI 0.0-1.9], four studies) and the highest risks in population-based studies without…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free