Evidence Hub

Migraine and the risk of stroke: an updated meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

Hu X, Zhou Y, Zhao H, Peng C

Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2017

2,221,888 participants

Abstract

Dozens of observational studies and two meta-analyses have investigated the association of migraine with the risk of stroke, but their results are inconsistent. We aimed to quantitatively evaluate the relationship between migraine and stroke risk by performing a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. PubMed and Embase were searched through July 2016 to identify studies that met pre-stated inclusion criterion and reference lists of retrieved articles were also reviewed. Information on the characteristics of the included study, risk estimates, and control for possible confounding factors were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled risk estimates. Eleven prospective cohort studies involving 3371 patients with stroke and 2,221,888 participants were included in this systematic review. Compared with non-migraineurs, the pooled relative risks of total stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and ischemic stroke for migraineurs were 1.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38-1.75], 1.15 (95% CI 0.85-1.56), and 1.64 (95% CI 1.22-2.20), respectively. Exception of any single study did not materially alter the combined risk estimate. Integrated epidemiological evidence supports that migraine should be associated with the increased risk of total stroke and ischemic stroke, but the relationship between migraine and the risk of hemorrhagic stroke is not of certainty.

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: 2,221,888 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