Differentiation of acute cortical and subcortical XXXX by risk factors and clinical examination findings.

@entity1 @entity1095 @entity558 @entity64 @entity101 @entity6 @entity51 @entity2026 @entity1805 @entity955 @entity741 @entity385
BACKGROUND: Differentiation between acute cortical and subcortical @entity385 may be problematic when cortical @entity64 presents without obvious @entity51 such as @entity2026 , neglect or @entity1805 . This study explores @entity64 risk factors and clinical variables that may assist in this differentiation. METHODS: Records of consecutive @entity1 with acute @entity385 , examined within 72 h of symptom onset, were reviewed. @entity64 type was verified by clinical course and follow-up imaging. @entity64 risk factors and acute examination findings were compared by odds ratios and positive predictive values for cortical and subcortical @entity64 . RESULTS: For 355 @entity1 studied, 237 had cortical @entity64 and 118 had subcortical @entity64 . Odds ratios for cortical @entity64 were highest for @entity955 by EKG (OR = 4.77, CI = 2.08-10.94), recent hospitalization (OR = 4.51, CI = 2.39-8.53) and nonalert mental status (OR = 4.50, CI = 2.29-8.87). Possible @entity558 , @entity741 and @entity1095 were also significant, but @entity101 , age and @entity6 were not significantly different for the @entity64 subtypes. @entity51 were absent in 19.4% of cortical @entity64 @entity1 on initial examination. Predictive models were generated based on the presence or absence of @entity51 and the interaction of significant risk factors with degree of @entity51 . CONCLUSIONS: There are clinical features that, in addition to initial examination, may help differentiate cortical from subcortical @entity385 . These features may be relevant to both diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to @entity64 .
